vii. questions concerning non-self-governing...

VII. Questions Concerning Non-Self-Governing Territories1

A. CONSIDERATION DURING 1948

Under the provisions of resolution 66(I),adopted by the General Assembly on 14 Decem-ber 1946, and of resolutions 142(II) and 143(II),adopted by the Assembly on 3 November 1947,the Secretary-General had prepared summaries andanalyses of information transmitted in 1948 bythe Members of the United Nations responsiblefor the administration of Non-Self-GoverningTerritories.2 The summaries and analyses werefirst considered by the Special Committee on In-formation transmitted under Article 73 e of theCharter, created for this purpose by General As-sembly resolution 146(II) of 3 November 1947.The Special Committee met from 2 to 17 Septem-ber 1948 in Geneva, and from 23 to 29 Septem-ber in Paris, to consider the Secretary-General'ssummaries and analyses.

In its report (A/593) to the third regular ses-sion of the General Assembly, the Special Com-mittee included four draft resolutions, dealingwith: (1) the manner, timing and scope of thetransmission of information by the AdministeringPowers with regard to the Non-Self-GoverningTerritories under their jurisdiction; (2) the estab-lishment of a future special committee to con-sider such information; (3) liaison between sucha special committee and the Economic and So-cial Council; (4) and collaboration of the special-ized agencies in the field of information from Non-Self-Governing Territories.3

The Secretary-General's summaries and analyses,together with the report of the Special Committeeon the information transmitted, were consideredby the Fourth Committee at its 51st to 60th meet-ings from 30 September to 18 October, and its65th meeting on 26 October 1948. The FourthCommittee's report was considered by the Gen-eral Assembly at its 155th plenary meeting on 3November 1948. Five resolutions were adopted bythe General Assembly. Four of them were basedon the recommendations of the Special Commit-tee, and in all essential aspects were identical withthe four draft resolutions proposed by that body.

The fifth, resulting from a proposal submitted bythe representative of India, concerned the cessa-tion of the transmission of information on Non-Self-Governing Territories, in cases where the re-sponsible Government considers that the Terri-tories by becoming self-governing have ceased tofall under the scope of Chapter XI of the Charter.

During the debates, reservations were madewith regard to the sovereignty over certain Non-Self-Governing Territories of the MetropolitanPower transmitting information on these Terri-tories. Reservations concerning sovereignty ofthe United Kingdom Government with respect toBritish Honduras (Belize Territory), the Falk-land Islands (the Malvinas) and Aden Protectorate(Southern Yemen) were made by the represen-tatives of Guatemala, Argentina and Yemen, re-spectively. The United Kingdom representativereserved the position of his Government with re-spect to these three Territories. In the case of thetransmission of information in 1948 by the Nether-lands Government with respect to Indonesia, cer-tain representatives held that the Republic of Indo-nesia should not be classified as a Non-Self-Gov-erning Territory, since, in their opinion, it was aself-governing State, but no decision was takenon this matter.

1 For further information, see: Official Records of theGeneral Assembly for its third session (Part I) andfourth session, including summary records of plenarymeetings (separate vols. covering meetings 136 to 187,220 to 276, and separate annex to each vol.) and sum-mary records of meetings of the Fourth (Trusteeship,including Non-Self-Governing Territories) Committee(separate vols. covering meetings 50 to 85 and 86 to142, and separate annex to each vol.). See also publi-cations and documents referred to in text, e.g., reportsof the Special Committee on Information transmittedunder Article 73 e of the Charter, and summaries andanalyses prepared by the Secretary-General.

2 For summaries and analyses prepared by the Secre-tary-General, see: United Nations. Non-Self-GoverningTerritories. Summaries and analyses of information trans-mitted to the Secretary-General during 1948. LakeSuccess, New York, 1949. 686 p. (United Nations Pub-lications, Sales No.: 1949.VI.B.1.)

3 For text of the four draft resolutions and summariesof discussions in the Special Committee, see Yearbookof the United Nations, 1947-48, pp. 710-21.

720 Yearbook of the United Nations

1. Transmission of Information underArticle 73 e of the Charter

On 14 December 1946, the General Assemblyinvited Members transmitting information onNon-Self-Governing Territories to send to theSecretary-General, by 30 June of each year, themost recent information at their disposal; theSecretary-General was asked to summarize, analyseand classify the information received (66 ( I ) ) .

The following year, on 3 November, the As-sembly adopted a Standard Form for the guidanceof Members in the preparation of this information(142(II)).

The Standard Form consists of a list of headingsdivided into four main parts.4

I. General Information. This part is of anoptional nature, covering information on geo-graphy, history, people, government and humanrights in the Territory.

II. Social Conditions. This part is divided intosections on social problems of race and culturalrelations; labour and employment conditions; pub-lic health and sanitation; housing conditions andprogrammes; welfare and relief; crime statistics;description of penal administration; and informa-tion on development programmes.

III. Educational Conditions. This part covers,among other subjects, school education, informa-tion on adult education, vocational training andapprenticeship, the development of cultural in-stitutions, youth organizations, scientific research,and the protection and development of indigenousart, literature and folk-lore.

IV. Economic Conditions. This part containsseparate headings under natural resources, agri-culture, industry, standard of living, communica-tions and transport, public finance, banking andcredit, international trade and development pro-grammes.

Under a fifth part of the Standard Form, Mem-bers may submit pictorial information, if available.

By another resolution, adopted on 3 November1947, the Assembly authorized the Secretary-Gen-eral, in summarizing and analysing the informa-tion transmitted, to use supplementary officialmaterial on social, economic and educational con-ditions (143 (II) ). This material was, however, tobe limited to that made available by the Admin-istering Members for this purpose, or, with theagreement of the Member concerned, by the statis-tical services of the United Nations Secretariat.

The Special Committee which met in 1948 toexamine the Secretary-General's summaries andanalyses of the information transmitted recom-mended in its report changes in the procedure for

the transmission of information by the Admin-istering Powers, so as to provide for a more con-venient programme of work both for the Secre-tary-General and the Assembly.

The draft resolution proposed by the SpecialCommittee for adoption by the Assembly wouldinvite Members to transmit the most recent in-formation at their disposal as early as possible,and, at the latest, within a maximum period ofsix months following the expiration of the ad-ministrative year in the Territory concerned.

It would relieve Members from repeating datapreviously furnished, requiring them to report onlysuch changes in statistics and other appreciablechanges, including progress in development pro-grammes, as might have occurred in the previousyear. It would invite the Secretary-General to ex-tend the use of supplemental information, author-izing him, in order to provide a means of assessingthe information transmitted, to make use of allrelevant and comparable official information com-municated to the United Nations and the special-ized agencies on economic, social and educationalconditions in Non-Self-Governing Territories. Itwould further invite the Secretary-General to pre-pare (a) full summaries and analyses of informa-tion transmitted during 1949 and thereafter atthree-year intervals; (b) annual supplements inthe intervening years; and (c) annual summariesof any material voluntarily submitted under theoptional category of the Standard Form. Finally,the Secretary-General was asked, according to theterms of the draft resolution, to call the attentionof Members transmitting information to the com-ments made in the Special Committee in con-nexion with the Standard Form and the informa-tion received, and to invite Members which hadnot hitherto provided general information underthe optional category of the Standard Form tosupply such information in relation to the geo-graphy, history, people and human rights in theTerritories concerned.

The representative of the USSR, supported bythe representatives of the Byelorussian SSR,Czechoslovakia, the Ukrainian SSR, Poland andYugoslavia, objected to this resolution on thegrounds that it went counter to the Charter bynot mentioning information on the developmentof organs of self-government. These Membersheld that Article 73, read in its entirety, requiredthe Administering Members to transmit politicalinformation, and that consideration should not belimited to the subjects enumerated in paragraph"e" of that Article (i.e., on economic, social and

4 For full text of the Standard Form, see Yearbookof the United Nations, 1947-48, pp. 721-24.

Questions Concerning Non-Self-Governing Territories 721

educational conditions). It was stated that thelack of political independence of the Territorieswas the chief reason for their low standard ofeconomic development, and that, if this thesis werenot accepted, then the areas in question wouldnever achieve political independence.

In opposition, it was argued that, while the Ad-ministering Powers were obliged under Article 73to promote the political development of the Terri-tories, paragraph "e" alone set forth the terms oftheir obligations to submit information. In par-ticular, the representatives of Belgium, France, theUnited Kingdom and the Netherlands emphasizedthat they were not prepared to discuss in anyorgan of the United Nations political or constitu-tional matters affecting the relations between theNon-Self-Governing Territories and the metropol-itan countries. The representative of Denmarkagreed that the transmission of political informa-tion was voluntary, but stated that his Governmentwould gladly continue to transmit such informa-tion. He also stated that if the resolution pro-posed by the Special Committee were adopted, itwould be possible to make valuable comparisonsbetween the conditions in Non-Self-GoverningTerritories, on the one hand, and neighbouring sov-ereign countries, on the other.

While similar views on the question of thetransmission of political information had been ad-vanced at earlier sessions of the Assembly, twonew arguments were introduced into the discussionat the third session. Considering that the trans-mission of political information was necessary asshowing the means by which economic, social andeducational advancement might be achieved, therepresentative of India expressed the hope thatsuch information would be supplied, not so muchas a matter of formal arrangement as by the devel-opment of conventions to this effect. The repre-sentative of Australia held, on the other hand,that just as Members administering Non-Self-Gov-erning Territories had accepted the declaration ofpolicy in Chapter XI of the Charter, so the non-administering Members had undertaken an obliga-tion to respect the limitations of Article 73. Hetherefore contended that, while the discussion ofinformation transmitted under Article 73 e waswithin the competence of the Assembly, ChapterXI recognizing the full authority of the Admin-istering Powers and their ability and willingness tocarry out the policies of that Chapter without theneed of supervision.

At the 54th meeting of the Fourth Committeeon 11 October 1948, the representative of theUSSR introduced a draft resolution (A/C.4/134)noting that the information transmitted did not

reflect the situation existing in the Territories, andthat the report of the Special Committee containedno evaluation of that information or proposals re-garding its substance. In its operative part, theUSSR draft resolution would have made obligatorythe submission of information on "the develop-ment of organs of self-government in the Non-Self-Governing Territories and the participation ofthe local population in the work of these organs."It would have called for the inclusion in annualsummaries of data from both official and privatesources. Furthermore, the proposal would haveauthorized the Special Committee to "examinecommunications received from the local popula-tion", and would have recommended that UnitedNations representatives "should be sent annuallyto the Non-Self-Governing Territories in order tomake a survey of the situation on the spot."

A number of Members agreed in principle withthe USSR proposals, but indicated that they wouldsupport in preference the compromise resolutionpresented by the Special Committee, since theyfelt that the support of the Administering Powerswas necessary for the implementation of the reso-lution. These Members, including China, Cuba,India, Paraguay and the Philippines, also ex-pressed the hope that the Administering Powerswould voluntarily transmit political information.In this connexion, several Members complimentedthose Members which had voluntarily transmittedinformation of a political nature on the Territoriesunder their administration.

Other representatives, however, contended thatthe USSR proposals went far beyond the intentionof the framers of the Charter and constituted aclear violation of its principles. The system ofsupervision by the United Nations over the admin-istration of Trust Territories, as set out in ChaptersXII and XIII of the Charter, had been deliberatelyomitted from the Declaration on Non-Self-Gov-erning Territories.

Put to the vote on 15 October, at the 58th meet-ing of the Fourth Committee, the USSR draft reso-lution was rejected as a whole, after a paragraph byparagraph vote, by 6 votes in favour to 30 against.

Following this decision, the representative of theUSSR moved an amendment (A/C.4/139) to thedraft resolution of the Special Committee. Heproposed that the Secretary-General's summariesand analyses of information be prepared annually,and cover information transmitted on all the cate-gories of the Standard Form, including informa-tion on the "development of organs of self-govern-ment and the participation of the local populationin the work of these organs". This amendment wasalso rejected, by a vote of 6 in favour to 38 against.


The Fourth Committee then adopted, by a voteof 38 to 6, the draft resolution proposed by theSpecial Committee. This resolution was approved,without change, at the 155th plenary meeting ofthe General Assembly on 3 November 1948, by aroll-call vote of 41 to 6, with 2 abstentions, asfollows:In favour: Afghanistan, Australia, Belgium, Bolivia,

Brazil, Burma, Canada, Chile, China, Co-lombia, Cuba, Denmark, Dominican Republic, Ecuador,Egypt, Ethiopia, France, Greece, Honduras, Iceland,India, Iran, Iraq, Liberia, Luxembourg, Mexico, Nether-lands, New Zealand, Norway, Pakistan, Panama, Para-guay, Philippines, Siam (Thailand), Sweden, Syria,Turkey, United Kingdom, United States, Uruguay, Vene-zuela.Against: Byelorussian SSR, Czechoslovakia, Poland,

Ukrainian SSR, USSR, Yugoslavia.Abstaining: Argentina, Haiti.

During the general discussion on the FourthCommittee's report, preceding the adoption of thisresolution, the representative of India expressedregret that most of the Administering Powersshould insist on a narrow legalistic interpretationof Article 73 by not agreeing to transmit informa-tion of a political nature, even though the GeneralAssembly, by resolution 144(II) of 3 November1947, had recognized that the voluntary transmis-sion of such information was entirely in conformitywith the spirit of Article 73. The representativeof the USSR, supported by the representatives ofPoland and the Ukrainian SSR, again objected tothe resolution, on the grounds that it did not askAdministering Powers to supply information onthe development towards self-government of theTerritories and on the extent to which the nativepopulation was participating in local administra-tion. Furthermore, the representative of the USSRpointed out that this resolution, by requiring thatinformation under Article 73e should be furnishedonly every three years, was in fact a retrogressivemeasures as compared with previous Assembly reso-lutions (66(I) and 142(II)), which required theinformation to be furnished each year.

Resolution 218 (III), as adopted, read as fol-lows:

"The General Assembly,"Considering that, in the light of experience, resolu-

tion 66(I) adopted by the General Assembly on 14December 1946 and resolutions 142(II) and 143(II)adopted by the General Assembly on 3 November 1947require adaptation and amplification.

"1. Invites the Members transmitting informationunder Article 73 e of the Charter to send to the Secre-tary-General the most recent information which is attheir disposal, as early as possible and at the latest withina maximum period of six months following the expira-tion of the administrative year in the Non-Self-Govern-ing Territories concerned;

"2. Recommends that the Members, in transmittinginformation on the basis of the Standard Form, shouldnotify such changes in statistics and such other ap-preciable changes, including the progress achieved inaccordance with development programmes, as haveoccurred in the previous year and as affect the matterscovered by Article 73 e of the Charter, bearing in mindthat information already furnished on a previous oc-casion need not be repeated but that reference may bemade to the appropriate sources;

"3. Invites the Secretary-General to extend the useof supplemental information in future years and con-siders that, in order to provide a means of assessing theinformation transmitted under Article 73 e, the Secre-tary-General should be authorized to include in hissummaries and analyses all revelant and comparableofficial statistical information, within the categories re-ferred to in Article 73 e of the Charter, which hasbeen communicated to the United Nations or to thespecialized agencies;

"4. Invites the Secretary-General to prepare for theGeneral Assembly, and for any special committee whichthe General Assembly may appoint:

"(a) Full summaries and analyses of the informationtransmitted during 1949 and thereafter at three-yearintervals, showing the progress made over the three-year period in respect of economic, social and educa-tional conditions;

"(b) In the intervening years annual supplements,showing such changes in statistics and such other ap-preciable changes, including information on the progressachieved in accordance with development programmes,as have occurred in the previous year, together withrelevant statistics for the previous two years, as well asanalyses of different aspects of economic, social andeducational conditions to which attention may havebeen drawn in previous years;

"(c) Annual summaries of any material which theMembers may have voluntarily transmitted under theoptional category of the Standard Form;

"5. Invites the Secretary-General to distribute thedocuments referred to above as far as practicable in ac-cordance with the attached schedule;

"6. Decides that the Standard Form for the guidanceof Members in the preparation of information shouldbe retained for the coming year, but that the Secretary-General,

"(a) In communicating this Form to the Membersconcerned, should inform them of the comments madein the Special Committee in connexion with the con-tents of the Form and the information received;

"(b) Should endeavour as far as practicable to takeaccount of these comments in the preparation of hissummaries and analyses; and

"(c) Should invite the Members concerned whichhave not hitherto provided the general informationforming the optional category of the Standard Formnevertheless to supply such information in relation tothe geography, history, people of, and human rightsin the Territories concerned."

ScheduleInformation received before 1 June: summaries to be

communicated by the Secretary-General before 15 July.Information received in the month of June: summaries

to be communicated before 31 July.Analyses to be communicated by 31 July if practicable,

and in any event not later than 15 August.


2. Cessation of the Transmission ofInformation

The Non-Self-Governing Territories on whichMembers had transmitted or undertaken to trans-mit information under Article 73 e of the Charterwere enumerated in a resolution adopted by theGeneral Assembly on 14 December 1946. TheseTerritories, as enumerated, numbered seventy-four.Information had been received in 1947 on sixty-two, and in 1948 on sixty-three of these Terri-tories. France, the United Kingdom and theUnited States did not, however, transmit informa-tion on certain of the Territories enumerated bythe Assembly. In some cases, explanations weregiven for these omissions.

It was noted by the representative of India thatthe United Nations, in order to discharge properlyits functions under Chapter XI of the Charter,should be officially informed of the constitutionalchanges in the Territories concerned, so that itcould determine whether the discontinuance ofthe transmission of information was justified. On14 October 1948, he submitted to the 57th meet-ing of the Fourth Committee a draft resolution(A/C.4/133/Rev.l) providing for the collectionof information to show which of the Territorieswere still to be regarded as non-self-governing, andwhich might have become self-governing. Thedraft resolution was considered by the Committeeat its 60th meeting on 8 October 1948. Under theoperative part of this draft resolution, the Assem-bly would welcome any development of self-gov-ernment that might have taken place in any of theTerritories, but would consider that, having regardto the provisions of Chapter XI of the Charter"it is essential that the United Nations be informed ofany change in the constitutional position and statusof any such territory as a result of which the responsibleGovernment concerned thinks it unnecessary to trans-mit information in respect of that territory under Article73 (e)

The Assembly would further request the Mem-bers concerned to communicate to the Secretary-General such information as may be appropriate,"including the constitution, legislative act or executiveorder providing for the government of the territoryand the constitutional relationship of the territory tothe Government of the metropolitan country."

The Indian proposal was opposed by some of theMetropolitan Powers, including the United King-dom, Belgium and Australia, on the grounds thatit went beyond the scope of Article 73 and tendedto imply a supervisory role which the United Na-tions was not, under the Charter, entitled to per-form with regard to Non-Self-Governing Terri-tories not placed under the Trusteeship System.

The representative of New Zealand, althoughagreeing with the principle embodied in the reso-lution, felt that some difficulty would arise in theapplication of this principle. He feared that thepurpose of asking for the information in questionwould appear to be a discussion on whether thedecision was appropriate that a given territory hadceased to be non-self-governing and might involvea debate on the definition of the term "Non-Self-Governing Territory", which was not within thecompetence of the Fourth Committee.

The majority of other representatives, includingthose of Denmark and the United States, bothMetropolitan Powers, did not, however, agree withthese points of view. Most of these consideredthat the United Nations had the right to determinewhether the Territories in question had actuallybecome self-governing or whether the Administer-ing Powers were still under the obligation to trans-mit information under Article 73 e. The UnitedStates and Denmark, while supporting the Indiandraft resolution, did so with the reservation thatthe transmission of the information requested didnot alter the right of each Administering State todetermine the constitutional position and status ofany particular Territory under its sovereignty.

Three amendments to the Indian draft resolu-tion were presented by the representative of Po-land (A/C.4/141). The first amendment, whichwould have emphasized the obligation of Admin-istering Powers under Article 73 to supply infor-mation on every Territory not yet fully self-gov-erning, the Committee rejected by a vote of 10 infavour to 21 against, with 16 abstentions.

The Committee adopted by a vote of 27 to 8,with 12 abstentions, the first operative paragraphof the Indian proposal (welcoming any develop-ment of self-government that may have takenplace), thus rejecting the second Polish amend-ment calling for the deletion of that paragraph.

The second operative paragraph of the Indianproposal (asking that the United Nations be in-formed of constitutional changes in any of theTerritories enumerated) was adopted by a vote of32 to none, with 15 abstentions.

The Committee rejected by 10 votes in favourto 23 against, with 14 abstentions, a third Polishamendment which proposed the submission, in ad-dition, of information on "the structure and pow-ers of the territorial government, including the ex-tent and nature of the participation therein of thelocal inhabitants."

An oral Belgian proposal to delete the latterpart of the last paragraph of the Indian draftresolution (i.e., from the words: "including theconstitution . . ." to "the metropolitan country"),


was rejected by a vote of 13 in favour to 22against.

The last operative paragraph of the Indian reso-lution was then adopted by a vote of 30 to 3, with13 abstentions.

The Indian resolution as a whole was thereuponapproved by a vote of 29 to none, with 17 ab-stentions.

The draft resolution was included in the Com-mittee's report to the General Assembly (A/695).During the discussion on this report, the repre-sentatives of the United Kingdom and Franceagain objected to the adoption of the draft reso-lution in question. The representative of theUnited Kingdom stated that his Government hadalways made public any changes affecting the con-stitution of a Territory or its relation with theMetropolitan Power, and would continue to sup-ply the United Nations library with publicationscontaining detailed information on these questions.The representative of France stated that he ob-jected, not to the substance of the resolution, sincehis Government had already forwarded such in-formation and documents to the United Nations,but to the fact that the adoption of this resolutionwould represent an attempt to set a definition ofNon-Self-Governing Territories. His Governmentdid not feel, however, that it was obliged to trans-mit to the United Nations the official instrumentsauthorizing the changes, which then might wellbecome a subject of discussion in the United Na-tions. In the opinion of his Government, theUnited Nations was not competent to considerconstitutional and political questions concerningNon-Self-Governing Territories or to exercise anysupervision over their administration. Such ques-tions, he stated, were the exclusive concern of theMember State and of the local authorities andpeople of the Territories for which it was re-sponsible. He indicated that the inhabitants of theTerritories concerned also shared this point ofview.

Following the general discussion on Non-Self-Governing Territories, the President asked whetherthere was any objection to the resolution's adop-tion. Since there was at that time no reply, theresolution (222( I I I ) ) was declared adopted on3 November 1948, at the 155th plenary meetingof the Assembly. The text read:

"Whereas, by Article 73 e of the Charter, Membersof the United Nations which have or assume responsi-bilities for the administration of territories whosepeoples have not yet attained a full measure of self-government have accepted the obligation to transmit,subject to such limitation as security and constitutionalconsiderations may require, statistical and other infor-mation of a technical nature relating to the economic,social and educational conditions in those territories,

"Whereas, by General Assembly resolution 66(I)adopted on 14 December 1946, seventy-four territorieswere enumerated, in accordance with the declarationsof the responsible Governments, as falling within thescope of Article 73 e,

"Whereas some of the responsible Governments con-cerned have not transmitted information on certain ofthese territories in 1947 and in 1948 without furnishingany explanation for such omission,

"The General Assembly"1. Welcomes any development of self-government

that may have taken place subsequent to the passing ofGeneral Assembly resolution 66(I) in any of the terri-tories enumerated therein;

"2. Considers that, having regard to the provisionsof Chapter XI of the Charter, it is essential that theUnited Nations be informed of any change in theconstitutional position and status of any such territoryas a result of which the responsible Government con-cerned thinks it unnecessary to transmit informationin respect of that territory under Article 73 e of theCharter; and

"3. Requests the Members concerned to communicateto the Secretary-General, within a maximum period ofsix months, such information as may be appropriatepursuant to the preceding paragraph, including theconstitution, legislative act or executive order providingfor the government of the territory and the constitu-tional relationship of the territory to the Governmentof the metropolitan country."

3. Collaboration with the Economic andSocial Council and the SpecializedAgencies in Connexion with Article

73 e of the Charter

In 1946 and again in 1947, the General As-sembly made provision for collaboration with theEconomic and Social Council and the specializedagencies as regards the information transmittedunder Article 73 e of the Charter. Representativesof the International Labour Organisation (ILO),the United Nations Educational, Scientific andCultural Organization (UNESCO) and the WorldHealth Organization (WHO) participated activelyin the discussions of the 1948 Special Committeeon subjects with which they were directly con-cerned, and gave information on the work of theiragencies which included within its scope condi-tions affecting Non-Self-Governing Territories.This Special Committee recommended to theFourth Committee two resolutions concerned spe-cifically with liaison between the Economic andSocial Council and the Special Committee, andwith collaboration with the specialized agencies.

During the general discussion from the 52nd to57th meetings of the Fourth Committee, from 6to 14 October 1948, on the question of Non-Self-Governing Territories, the representatives of India,Ecuador and China mentioned the usefulness ofcollaboration with the Economic and Social Coun-


cil and the specialized agencies. The representa-tive of India further suggested that the agencies,in considering the progress achieved in the Non-Self-Governing Territories in the fields with whichthey were concerned, should utilize the services ofthe indigenous inhabitants as far as possible. Therepresentative of China stated that one of thegreat problems in Non-Self-Governing Territories,as in other countries, was the lack of trained per-sonnel in the technical field; he considered it ofthe utmost importance that the AdministeringPowers should supply technical personnel untilsuch time as a sufficient number of the indigenouspopulation could be suitably trained. He also feltthat any technical information available whichmight be useful to the Administering Powersshould be placed at their disposal.

Several representatives, including those of theByelorussian SSR, Czechoslovakia, Poland, theUkrainian SSR, the USSR and Yugoslavia, how-ever, expressed opposition to the two resolutionsproposed by the Special Committee. The repre-sentative of the USSR found unacceptable the sug-gestion to transmit information to the specializedagencies, as this was only intended to deprive theUnited Nations of the possibility of reviewing theadministration of the Non-Self-Governing Terri-tories.

At the request of the representative of Poland,the Secretary-General's representative to theFourth Committee informed the Committee, at its57th meeting on 14 October 1948, of the natureof the technical assistance schemes approved bythe Economic and Social Council. He summarizedthose resolutions of the Council which providedfor expert assistance to Member States in the eco-nomic, social and cultural fields by, or in co-opera-tion with, the specialized agencies. He cited in-stances of assistance provided by the United Na-tions to the Governments of Venezuela, Haiti andTurkey, and said that, in addition, advisory socialwelfare expert assistance had been provided to alarge number of countries. He also outlined in-stances of technical assistance furnished inde-pendently by the specialized agencies.

The two draft resolutions proposed by the Spe-cial Committee were put to the vote at the 60thmeeting of the Fourth Committee on 18 October1948.

The resolution calling for liaison between theEconomic and Social Council and any special com-mittee which the Assembly might appoint wasadopted, with a minor textual amendment, by avote of 31 to none, with 6 abstentions. It wasalso carried in the Assembly on 3 November 1948,

by a roll-call vote of 44 to none, with 7 absten-tions, as follows:In favour: Afghanistan, Argentina, Australia, Belgium,

Bolivia, Brazil, Burma, Canada, Chile, China,Colombia, Costa Rica, Cuba, Denmark, Dominican Re-public, Ecuador, Egypt, Ethiopia, France, Greece, Haiti,Honduras, Iceland, India, Iran, Iraq, Lebanon, Liberia,Luxembourg, Mexico, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nor-way, Pakistan, Panama, Paraguay, Philippines, Siam(Thailand), Sweden, Turkey, United Kingdom, UnitedStates, Uruguay, Venezuela.Against: None.Abstaining: Byelorussian SSR, Czechoslovakia, Poland,

Syria, Ukrainian SSR, USSR, Yugoslavia.

The resolution (220( I I I ) ) , as adopted, read:"The General Assembly,"Having considered the report of the Special Commit-

tee on Information transmitted under Article 73 e ofthe Charter which was constituted by resolution 146(II)adopted by the General Assembly on 3 November 1947,and which was authorized to establish liaison with theEconomic and Social Council,

"1. Invites the Secretary-General to:"(a) Inform any special committee which the Gen-

eral Assembly may appoint of decisions taken by theEconomic and Social Council and of studies undertakenunder its auspices which include within their scopeeconomic and social conditions affecting Non-Self-Gov-erning Territories;

" (b) Place at the disposal of the Economic and SocialCouncil all relevant information transmitted underArticle 73 e and all relevant supplemental informationrequired for the work of the Economic and Social Coun-cil;

"2. Draws the attention of the Members responsiblefor the administration of Non-Self-Governing Territoriesto the arrangements for technical assistance approvedby the Economic and Social Council, and invites theSecretary-General to inform any special committee whichthe General Assembly may appoint of the extent andnature of any such technical assistance rendered to Non-Self-Governing Territories at the request of Administer-ing Members."

The draft resolution relating to collaborationwith the specialized agencies was adopted by theFourth Committee by a vote of 31 to none, with7 abstentions. It was subsequently passed by theAssembly on 3 November, by a roll-call vote of44 to none, with 7 abstentions:

In favour: Afghanistan, Argentina, Australia, Belgium,Bolivia, Brazil, Burma, Canada, Chile, Co-

lombia, Costa Rica, Cuba, Denmark, Dominican Repub-lic, Ecuador, Egypt, Ethiopia, France, Greece, Haiti,Honduras, Iceland, India, Iran, Iraq, Lebanon, Liberia,Luxembourg, Mexico, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nor-way, Pakistan, Panama, Paraguay, Philippines, Siam(Thailand), Sweden, Turkey, United Kingdom, UnitedStates, Uruguay, Venezuela.Against: None.Abstaining: Byelorussian SSR, Czechoslovakia, Poland,

Syria, Ukrainian SSR, USSR, Yugoslavia.

The resolution was as follows (221 (III)):


"The General Assembly,"Having considered the report of the Special Com-

mittee on Information transmitted under Article 73 eof the Charter which was constituted by resolution1 4 6 ( ) adopted by the General Assembly on 3 No-vember 1947, and which was authorized to avail itselfof the counsel and assistance of the specialized agencies,

"1. Has noted the resolution adopted by the WorldHealth Assembly and welcomes the measures beingtaken by the World Health Organization to examinethe section of the Standard Form relating to publichealth and sanitation, and in other ways to providetechnical assistance in the preparation and considerationof information transmitted under Article 73 e of theCharter;

"Has also noted the information supplied by the In-ternational Labour Office with particular reference tothe ratification and application of international labourconventions concerning Non-Self-Governing Territoriesand to the study which is being undertaken in regardto migrant labour problems;

"Has also noted the explanations furnished by therepresentative of the United Nations Educational, Sci-entific and Cultural Organization on the services whichthat organization is providing in Non-Self-GoverningTerritories with the consent of the Members responsiblefor the administration of these territories;

"2. Invites the Secretary-General to keep in closetouch with the secretariats of the specialized agencieswith a view to seeking their counsel and assistance inthe preparation of his analyses of information trans-mitted under Article 73 e of the Charter;

"3. Invites the specialized agencies to examine therelevant sections of the Standard Form with which theyare specially concerned, with a view to the revisionof this Form;

"4. Invites the specialized agencies to inform anyspecial committee which the General Assembly may ap-point of the progress of any work undertaken by themwhich includes within its scope economic, social andeducational conditions affecting Non-Self-GoverningTerritories;

"5. Futher invites the appropriate specialized agenciesto make such comments on the analyses prepared bythe Secretary-General as they may feel will be helpfulto the consideration of these analyses."

4. Establishment of Special Committeeon Information Transmitted under

Article 73 e of the Charterto meet in 1949

By resolution 66(I) of 14 December 1946, theAssembly had established an ad hoc committee tomeet in 1947 to examine the Secretary-General'ssummaries and analyses of information transmittedon Non-Self-Governing Territories, with a viewto aiding the Assembly in its consideration of theinformation, and to making recommendations onthe procedures to be followed in the future andon ways to ensure that the advice, expert knowl-edge and experience of the specialized agencies areused to the best advantage. By Assembly resolu-tion 146(II) of 3 November 1947, the ad hoc

committee was replaced by a Special Committeeon Information transmitted under Article 73 e ofthe Charter. The terms of reference of this Com-mittee were less exclusively procedural. It was in-vited to examine the information transmitted oneconomic, social and educational conditions, andto submit reports on these subjects for the consid-eration of the Assembly. It was to make pro-cedural recommendations, and substantive recom-mendations relating to functional fields generally,but not with respect to individual territories.

This Special Committee, which met from 2 to29 September 1948, recommended in a draft resolu-tion submitted to the Assembly, the establishmentof a new Special Committee with similar terms ofreference to meet in 1949 "without prejudice as tothe future".

At the third session of the General Assembly,there was considerable discussion during the gen-eral debate in the Fourth Committee, from 6 to14 October 1948, on the subject of continuing theSpecial Committee. The Fourth Committee exam-ined the proposed draft resolution at its 59th meet-ing on 16 October 1948. The representatives ofCuba and Venezuela introduced an amendment(A/C.4/137) proposing that the Special Commit-tee be constituted on a permanent basis. Later,they withdrew their joint proposal in favour of anamendment submitted by the representative ofBrazil (A/C.4/136), because they considered thatthis amendment, asking that the Special Commit-tee be constituted on a three-year basis, was morelikely to meet with general approval. On the samegrounds, the Iraqi representative supported theBrazilian amendment.

Upon the withdrawal by the representatives ofCuba and Venezuela of their joint proposal, therepresentative of Poland re-introduced it as hisown amendment.

The Polish amendment to establish a permanentcommittee was supported by the Byelorussian SSR,Czechoslovakia, Mexico, the USSR, Uruguay andVenezuela. Some of these Members contendedthat the Assembly resolution of 3 November 1947had already created the Special Committee on apermanent basis, since it contained no limitationof time, but merely required the Committee tomeet as the Assembly might decide. In favour ofa permanent committee, it was argued that theobligation of the United Nations toward Non-Self-Governing Territories would continue as long asthere were such Territories, and that the Assemblyhad the authority, under Article 22 of the Charter,to set up a subsidiary body on a continuous orpermanent basis to assist it in carrying out theseobligations.


A number of Members, including China, theDominican Republic, Egypt, India and Norway,while indicating their preference for a permanentcommittee, supported the resolution proposed bythe Special Committee, some because it repre-sented a compromise reached by a committee con-sisting of an equal number of Administering andnon-administering States, and some on the groundsthat the Polish or Brazilian amendments wouldnot obtain the required two-thirds vote of the As-sembly, and that there would then be no commit-tee in 1949. Other Members supporting the Spe-cial Committee's resolution held that the proposalto establish a permanent committee was prema-ture; this point of view was shared by the repre-sentatives of Australia, Chile, the Netherlands,New Zealand and the United States.

The representatives of Belgium, France and theUnited Kingdom also supported the Special Com-mittee's resolution, the representative of theUnited Kingdom stating that the Committeeestablished by the Assembly on 3 November 1947had been created primarily for the purpose of com-pleting a technique for the collection and trans-mission of information; this work, he indicated,should be completed in 1949, and the appoint-ment of a further special committee would thenbe unnecessary.

A roll-call vote was taken on the Polish amend-ment proposing a permanent committee. It wasrejected by a tie vote of 17 to 17, with 18 ab-stentions.5 The Brazilian amendment was also re-jected, by a roll-call vote of 11 in favour, 19 against,with 21 abstentions.

Paragraph 1 of the Special Committee's resolu-tion, calling for the establishment of a committeefor a period of one year, was then adopted by avote of 41 to 7.

Another amendment to the Special Committee'sresolution was proposed by the USSR (A/C.4/-138), with a view to broadening the functions ofthe new committee. This amendment, rejected bya vote of 8 in favour to 26 against, with 17 ab-stentions, would have altered paragraph 2 to readas follows:

"Invites the Special Committee to examine the infor-mation transmitted under Article 73 e of the Charteron the economic, social and educational conditions, aswell as on the development of institutions of self-gov-ernment and on the participation of the people in thework of the local organs of self-government; includingall data supplied by the specialized agencies, as wellas information transmitted to the Secretary-General byprivate persons, and local groups and organizations; tosubmit to the General Assembly a report on the infor-mation accompanied by comments and conclusions; andalso to prepare appropriate recommendations."

Paragraph 2, as recommended by the Special

Committee, was then adopted by a vote of 37 to 7,and paragraph 3 (see below) by 39 votes to 1. Afourth paragraph, inviting the Fourth Committeeto take the necessary action on behalf of the As-sembly, was deleted by a vote of 1 in favour to 37against, on the ground that this was implied in thedraft resolution, and it was therefore unnecessaryto make this point explicit. Subject to this dele-tion, the Fourth Committee adopted the resolutionas a whole, as recommended by the Special Com-mittee, by a vote of 38 to 7.

During the general debate on the Fourth Com-mittee's report at the 155th plenary meeting ofthe Assembly, the representatives of Poland, theUSSR and Yugoslavia again opposed the adop-tion of this resolution. The draft resolution, theyfelt, was retrogressive in that resolution 146(II) ofthe year before had, in their opinion, established apermanent special committee. By limiting thefunctions of the Committee, it was contended, theresolution before the Assembly would limit theUnited Nations in the exercise of its obligationstoward Non-Self-Governing Territories.

The representatives of India and the Philippinesexpressed their hope that in another year, the Ad-ministering Powers would agree to the establish-ment of a special committee on a permanent basis.

A roll-call vote on the resolution was taken.In favour: Afghanistan, Argentina, Australia, Belgium,

Bolivia, Burma, Canada, Chile, China, Co-lombia, Cuba, Denmark, Dominican Republic, Ecuador,Egypt, Ethiopia, France, Greece, Haiti, Honduras, Ice-land, India, Iran, Iraq, Lebanon, Liberia, Luxembourg,Mexico, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Pakistan,Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Siam (Thailand),Sweden, Syria, Turkey, United Kingdom, United States,Uruguay, Venezuela.Against: Brazil, Byelorussian SSR, Czechoslovakia, Po-

land, Ukrainian SSR, USSR, Yugoslavia.

Thus adopted without change, on 3 November1948, by 44 votes to 7, the resolution read as fol-lows (219(III)):

"The General Assembly,"Having considered the report of the Special Com-

tee on Information transmitted under Article 73 e ofthe Charter which was constituted by resolution 146(II) adopted by the General Assembly on 3 November1947,

"1. Considers that, without prejudice as to the future,a special committee, similar to that of this year shouldbe constituted to meet in 1949, composed of all theMembers of the United Nations which have hithertotransmitted information in accordance with Article 73 eand an equal number of other Members elected by theFourth Committee on behalf of the General Assembly,on as wide a geographical basis as possible;

"2. Invites this special committee to examine thesummaries and analyses of information transmitted under

5 Under the rules of procedure, a proposal receivingequally divided votes is regarded as rejected.


Article 73 e on the economic, social and educationalconditions in the Non-Self-Governing Territories, in-cluding any papers prepared by the specialized agencies,and to submit a report thereon for the consideration ofthe General Assembly, with such procedural recom-mendations as the special committee may deem fit andsuch substantive recommendations as it may deem de-sirable relating to functional fields generally but notwith respect to individual territories;

"3. Considers that the special committee shouldmeet in 1949, not later than three weeks before theopening of the regular session of the General Assemblyat a place to be determined by the. Secretary-General,and should conclude its work not later than one weekbefore the opening of the session."

a. ELECTION OF MEMBERS OF THE SPECIALCOMMITTEE

By the terms of the above resolution, the SpecialCommittee was to be composed of all the Mem-bers of the United Nations which had hithertotransmitted information under Article 73 e, andof an equal number of other Members to beelected by the Fourth Committee on behalf of theGeneral Assembly on as wide a geographical basisas possible.

There were eight Members entitled to automaticrepresentation on the Special Committee by virtueof the fact that they had transmitted informationunder Article 73 e: Australia, Belgium, Denmark,France, the Netherlands, New Zealand, the UnitedKingdom and the United States.

The Fourth Committee, at its 74th meeting on 8November 1948, elected the following Membersto complete the Committee: China, India, Brazil,Egypt, the USSR, the Dominican Republic,Sweden, Venezuela.

The Assembly, at its 159th plenary meeting on18 November 1948, took note of the elections.

As a result of the Fourth Committee's actionand of the Assembly's resolution of 3 November,the Special Committee on Information transmittedunder Article 73 e of the Charter established tomeet in 1949 was, therefore, composed of repre-sentatives of Australia, Belgium, Brazil, China,Denmark, the Dominican Republic, Egypt, France,India, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Sweden, theUSSR, the United Kingdom, the United States andVenezuela.

B. CONSIDERATION DURING 1949

The Special Committee established by GeneralAssembly resolution 219(III) met at Lake Suc-cess, New York, from 25 August to 12 September1949. It elected Benjamin Gerig (United States)as Chairman, B. Shiva Rao (India) as Vice-Chair-man, and Enrique de Marchena (Dominican Re-public) as Rapporteur. Representatives of the fol-lowing specialized agencies took part in the dis-cussions of the Special Committee as they affectedthe work of their organizations: World HealthOrganization, International Labour Organisation,United Nations Educational, Scientific and CulturalOrganization, and the Food and Agriculture Or-ganization.

In its report to the fourth session of the GeneralAssembly, the Special Committee recommendedsix draft resolutions (A/923). They dealt with:(1) the voluntary transmission of information onNon-Self-Governing Territories; (2) equal treat-ment in matters relating to education; (3) lan-guage of instruction; (4) eradication of illiteracy;(5) international collaboration in regard to eco-nomic, social and educational conditions in Non-Self-Governing Territories; and (6) establishmentof a further Special Committee.

There was a general debate on the subject ofNon-Self-Governing Territories, from the 109th to117th meetings of the Assembly's Fourth Commit-tee, held from 27 October to 5 November 1949.

The Fourth Committee then discussed, until its122nd meeting on 10 November, the six resolu-tions recommended by the Special Committee.Five additional draft resolutions and a number ofamendments were submitted, and these were dis-cussed by the Fourth Committee from its 123rdmeeting on 11 November to its 127th meeting on17 November. These draft resolutions were:

(1) A proposal by Egypt, authorizing any Spe-cial Committee which the Assembly might ap-point to examine the factors which should be takeninto account in deciding the Territories to whichChapter XI of the Charter applies (A/C.4/L37).

(2) A proposal by India, substituting a newtext for that proposed by the Special Committeefor the establishment of a Special Committee.

(3) A joint proposal by Cuba, Ecuador andGuatemala, inviting the Secretary-General to com-plement the summaries and analyses by the period-ical publication of data on special aspects of theprogress achieved in Non-Self-Governing Terri-tories.

(4) A joint proposal by Mexico and theUnited States that the Special Committee shouldconcentrate on one functional field each year,choosing for 1950 the problem of education.

(5) A proposal by Australia, requesting theSecretary-General to keep the Special Committeeinformed of the nature of the technical assistance


accorded to Non-Self-Governing Territories byspecialized international agencies.

Ten draft resolutions were included in theFourth Committee's report to the General Assem-bly (A/1159 and Corr.1). This report was con-sidered by the Assembly at its 262nd and 263rdplenary meetings on 1 and 2 December 1949.

During the final debate on this report, the repre-sentatives of Belgium, France and the United King-dom maintained that the resolutions before theAssembly went beyond the requirements of theCharter with respect to Non-Self-Governing Ter-ritories. If the Assembly adopted them, particu-larly the resolutions relating to the establishmentand functions of the Special Committee, it wouldbe exceeding its constitutional powers. There wasa growing tendency in the Assembly, they charged,to depart further and further away from the Char-ter in an attempt to impose United Nations super-vision over the administration of the Territories.These representatives stressed that they would con-tinue to fulfil their obligations under the Charter:their obligations towards the populations of theNon-Self-Governing Territories, which, theystated, devolved solely on the Administering Pow-ers; and their obligations towards the United Na-tions, which were limited to the submission of in-formation of a non-political nature on the Terri-tories. They indicated that their Governmentswould not, however, comply with those resolutionswhich sought to extend these obligations in con-travention of the Charter.

Other participants in the plenary discussions, in-cluding the representatives of Poland, Egypt, Indiaand Mexico, supported the resolutions relating toNon-Self-Governing Territories as an attempt tomake Article 73 of the Charter a provision of in-creasing reality and significance for the 200,000,-000 people living in these Territories. These rep-resentatives disagreed with the view that the Ad-ministering Powers alone were responsible for thedevelopment of non-self-governing peoples. Theyheld, on the contrary, that since the Declaration onNon-Self-Governing Territories is an integral partof the Charter to which all Members of the UnitedNations are committed, it was the duty of allMembers to determine that the principles em-bodied in this Declaration were followed. Therepresentative of Egypt appealed to the Admin-istering Powers to adopt a liberal interpretation ofChapter XI. The representative of Mexico pointedout that the various statements made during thedebates on Non-Self-Governing Territories seemedto augur a serious crisis which might arise in con-nexion with the implementation of Chapter XI.He expressed the hope that the objections raised

by some of the Administering Powers regardingthe work of the Fourth Committee would notimpede its work the following year. He suggestedthat it might be best for these Members, if they stillhad doubts as to the qualifications, powers andcompetence of the Fourth Committee, to consultthe International Court of Justice as to whetheror not the Assembly and the Fourth Committeewere working in accordance with the principles ofthe Charter.

Action taken during 1949 by the Special Com-mittee, the Fourth Committee and the GeneralAssembly with respect to Non-Self-Governing Ter-ritories is described on the following pages.

1. Information Transmitted underArticle 73 e of the Charter

By General Assembly resolution 218(III) of3 November 1948, Members responsible for theadministration of Non-Self-Governing Territorieswere invited to transmit information as early aspossible and at the latest within a maximum periodof six months following the expiration of theadministrative year in the Territory concerned. Inpractice, the maximum period expires on 30 Junein the case of all the Territories, with the exceptionof those under the administration of Australia,New Zealand and the United States. In the firsttwo cases, the administrative year expires on31 March, and in the United States Territories on30 June.

Information concerning the following Non-Self-Governing Territories was transmitted during1949 by the Administering States concerned (initalics):6

Australia:Papua (A/914)

Belgium:Belgian Congo (A/910)

Denmark:Greenland (A/911)

France:(A/909 and Add.l):

Comoro ArchipelagoFrench Equatorial AfricaFrench SomalilandFrench West Africa

MadagascarMoroccoNew HebridesTunisia

6For summaries and analyses of this information, see:United Nations. Non-Self-Governing Territories. Sum-maries and analyses of information transmitted to theSecretary-General during 1949. Lake Success, New York,1950. (United Nations Publications, Sales No.: 1950.-VI.B.l.) Vol. I, General survey and analyses of infor-mation transmitted during 1949; Vol. II, Summaries ofinformation transmitted during 1949. 930 p.


Netherlands:(A/912 and Add.l):

CuraçaoSurinam

New Zealand:(A/913 and Add.l):

Cook IslandsNiue Island

United Kingdom:(A/908 and Adds. 1, 2,

Aden Colony and Protec-torate

BahamasBarbadosBasutolandBechuanaland ProtectorateBermudaBritish GuianaBritish HondurasBritish Solomon Islands

ProtectorateBritish Somaliland Pro-

tectorateBruneiCyprusDominicaFalkland IslandsFijiGambiaGibraltarGilbert and Ellice Islands

ColonyGold CoastGrenada

United States:(A/907):

AlaskaAmerican SamoaGuam

Indonesia

Tokelau Islands

3 and 4):Hong KongJamaicaKenya Colony and Protec-

torateLeeward IslandsMalaya, Federation ofMauritiusNigeriaNorth BorneoNorthern RhodesiaNyasaland ProtectoratePitcairn IslandSt. HelenaSt. LuciaSt. VincentSarawakSeychellesSierra LeoneSingaporeSwazilandTrinidad and TobagoUganda ProtectorateZanzibar Protectorate

HawaiiPuerto RicoVirgin Islands

Several reservations were made concerningUnited Kingdom sovereignty with respect tocertain Territories on which it had transmittedinformation during 1949. The representative ofChina stated in the Special Committee that al-though the United Kingdom Government hadtransmitted information under Hong Kong con-cerning the Kowloon Territory and the NewTerritories, sovereignty over these Territories wasvested in the Republic of China. During thegeneral debate in the Fourth Committee, the rep-resentative of Guatemala made a statement reaffirm-ing the position and the reservations of hisGovernment with respect to the Territory of Belize(British Honduras), and protested on behalf ofhis Government against the inclusion of this Ter-ritory in the proposed federation of BritishCaribbean Territories. The representative of Ar-gentina repeated the reservations of his Govern-ment in respect of the Malvina (Falkland) Islands,and was supported in these claims by the repre-

sentative of Guatemala. In each instance, therepresentative of the United Kingdom stated thathe fully reserved the rights of His Majesty'sGovernment over these Territories.

A proposal was introduced in the SpecialCommittee by the representative of the USSR towithdraw from discussion by the Committee infor-mation relating to the Indonesian Republic onthe ground that it was an independent State. TheSpecial Committee decided that it was not com-petent to consider this proposal.7

2. Cessation of the Transmission ofInformation

In a note dated 21 January 1949, the Secretary-General drew the attention of the Members con-cerned to resolution 222(III) of the GeneralAssembly concerning the cessation of the trans-mission of information. This note listed the Terri-tories on which information had not been trans-mitted in 1947 and 1948—the United KingdomTerritories of Malta and Pitcairn Island; the FrenchTerritories of Indo-China, French Establishmentsin Oceania, French Establishments in India, Gua-deloupe and Dependencies, New Caledonia andDependencies, French Guiana, Martinique, Re-union and St.-Pierre et Miquelon; and the PanamaCanal Zone under United States administration.The Secretary-General invited the AdministeringPowers to consider the Assembly's request and, inrelevant cases, to communicate such informationas might be appropriate by 3 May 1949.

The United Kingdom reply, dated 16 March1949, referred to statements made in 1947 in thead hoc Committee on the Transmission of Infor-mation under Article 73 e and in the Fourth Com-mittee to the effect that Malta, although not yetin full control of its external affairs, had attainedfull responsibility for local self-government on5 September 1947. Since economic, social andeducational conditions in Malta were now theexclusive concern of the Government of Malta,the United Kingdom concluded that it found it"inappropriate, and indeed impossible" to con-tinue the transmission of information on thesematters under Article 73 e. With regard to Pit-cairn Island, the United Kingdom hoped to beable to transmit some information for the year1948.

The French Government, in a letter of 29 April1949, maintained that "the determination of terri-tories whose peoples have not yet attained a fullmeasure of self-government lies exclusively within

7 For discussion of Indonesian Question, see pp. 212—37.


the competence of the States which have respon-sibilities for the administration of such territories."

The French Government considered that thisprinciple, and the status of the Territories withinthe framework of the French Union, had justifiedit in ceasing to transmit information after 1946on the Overseas Departments of Guadeloupe,Guiana, Martinique and Reunion, the regimes ofwhich were declared to be largely identical to thatof the Departments of France; and on the overseasterritories of New Caledonia, the French Settle-ments in Oceania and St.-Pierre et Miquelon,whose peoples, it was stated, already enjoyedextensive political rights, and which had beenprovided with a regime closely resembling that ofthe Overseas Departments or that of metropolitanFrance. In the case of the Associated States ofIndo-China (Cambodia, Laos and Viet-Nam), theFrench Government stated that its decision notto transmit information after 1947 was based onthe recognized powers of the Governments of theseStates, to which freedom of self-government tothe extent of independence within the frame-work of the French Union had been granted. TheFrench Settlements in India, the Governmentstated, had been given wide local liberties withina regime which enabled them to participate in theinstitutions of the French Republic, and their in-habitants, without distinction of origin or status,enjoyed political rights similar to those of thecitizens of metropolitan France.

The United States, in a note dated 18 August1949, pointed out that its action in ceasing totransmit information on the Panama Canal Zonefell outside the considerations which had led tothe request by the General Assembly. The notereferred to a statement made by the delegationof Panama to the Fourth Committee on 14 Novem-ber 1946, contesting the transmission of informa-tion on the Canal Zone on the grounds that theTerritory could not be considered a Non-Self-Governing Territory, and that sovereignty over theCanal Zone rested in the Republic of Panama.During the following years, the United States,while reserving its own position, had not trans-mitted information for the reason that, as it hadannually informed the Secretary-General, the statusof the Territory was a subject for consultationbetween the Governments of Panama and theUnited States.

These three communications were drawn to theattention of the 1949 Special Committee (A/915and Add.l). During the discussions in the Com-mittee, the USSR submitted a proposal to theeffect that an administering Member could notcease transmitting information on any given

Territory until the Special Committee had con-sidered all the data concerning changes in thestatus of the Territory and had made a recommen-dation to the Assembly regarding the suspensionof the transmission of information on the Terri-tory. While not accepting the contention of therepresentatives of Australia, Belgium, France, theNetherlands and the United Kingdom that theAdministering Powers were alone competent tojudge on which Territories information should betransmitted, other representatives agreed thatthe Committee was not competent under its termsof reference to consider the questions involved. Onthe motion of the representative of France, theCommittee decided, by 13 votes to 1, with 2abstentions, that it was not competent to considerthe USSR proposal.

A draft resolution concerning the Territoriesto which Chapter XI of the Charter applies wasproposed by the representative of Egypt to theFourth Committee, when the question again cameup for consideration (A/C.4/L.37). In its opera-tive part, the draft resolution stated that"the General Assembly has a responsibility to expressits opinion on the principles which have guided orwhich may in future guide the Members concernedin enumerating the territories for which the obligationexists to transmit information under Article 73 e of theCharter."

It also invited any special committee appointedby the Assembly"to examine the factors which should be taken into ac-count in deciding whether any territory is or is not aterritory whose people have not yet attained a fullmeasure of self-government."

Questioning whether it was in order to implyan obligation on the part of the Assembly toexpress its opinion on the question, the represent-ative of Thailand, on 14 November 1949, sug-gested that the resolution state that "it is withinthe responsibility of the General Assembly . . ."rather than "the General Assembly has a respon-sibility . . ." The Egyptian representative acceptedthis amendment.

Several members, in particular the represent-atives of the United Kingdom, France, Belgiumand Australia, objected to the Egyptian draffresolution on the ground that only the Adminis-tering Authority concerned was entitled to deter-mine whether or not it was responsible for trans-mitting information on a particular territory. TheUnited Kingdom representative referred to thephrase in Article 73 e of the Charter which statedthat the transmission of information was "subjectto such limitation as security and constitutionalconsiderations may require." Only the Metropoli-tan Power concerned was in a position to decide


the question of security considerations and of itsown constitutional relationship with each of theTerritories for which it was responsible. Therepresentative of France, supported by the Belgianrepresentative, maintained that to adopt theEgyptian draft resolution without first formulatinga definition of the term "Non-Self-GoverningTerritory" would be to put the cart before thehorse. Even if such a definition were reached,however, the Assembly would still have no powerto decide on the application of that definition toindividual territories. These representatives fur-ther stated that there were other non-self-govern-ing peoples in territories or in reservations to whichthe provisions of Chapter XI might apply, andit was therefore unjust that these provisionsshould be held to apply only to those Powers whichhad loyally complied with its terms. The repre-sentative of Canada claimed that the Special Com-mittee was not the competent body to considerthe factors which should be taken into account indeciding whether or not a territory was non-self-governing, and on these grounds opposed the draftresolution.

In support of the Egyptian draft resolution, itwas argued that, under the Charter, all Mem-bers of the United Nations had a responsibilitytoward Non-Self-Governing Territories, and theresolution in question would merely enable theAssembly to discharge these responsibilities. Theobligation of Administering Powers to transmitinformation existed until a Territory had at-tained full self-government, and the Assemblycould request Members to observe this obligation.After the Assembly had accepted the list of seventy-four Territories as coming within the terms ofArticle 73 e, it was stated, only the Assemblycould reduce that number by deleting Territorieswhich had become self-governing. With regardto the limitation required by constitutional con-siderations, referred to by the United Kingdomrepresentative, it was argued that the Assemblyhad the right to determine whether the constitu-tional considerations which might be invoked bythe Administering Powers were or were not wellfounded. Further, constitutional considerationscould not justify an infringement of the Charterprovisions; constitutions should comply with, andnot contradict, these provisions.

In an effort to conciliate the points of viewadvanced during the debate, the representative ofUruguay submitted an amendment to the Egyptiandraft resolution to provide that the Assemblyexpress its opinion on the meaning of the term"Non-Self-Governing Territory" and that theSpecial Committee annually examine the list of

Territories on which information was receivedunder Article 73 e. This amendment was rejectedby the Fourth Committee, on 16 November 1949,by 28 votes to 1, with 16 abstentions.

On the same day, by 30 votes to 10, with 7abstentions, the Committee adopted the Egyptiandraft resolution, as amended by Thailand (A/C.4/-L.37/Rev.2).

Following a brief debate during the Assembly's262nd and 263rd meetings, in the course of whichseveral of the points raised in the Fourth Com-mittee were again expressed, the Assembly, on2 December 1949, approved this resolution, with-out change, by a roll-call vote of 30 to 12, with10 abstentions:In favour: Afghanistan, Argentina, Brazil, Burma, By-

elorussian SSR, China, Cuba, Czechoslovakia,Egypt, Ethiopia, Guatemala, Haiti, India, Iran, Iraq,Israel, Lebanon, Liberia, Mexico, Pakistan, Philippines,Poland, Saudi Arabia, Thailand, Ukrainian SSR, USSR,Uruguay, Venezuela, Yemen, Yugoslavia.Against: Australia, Belgium, Canada, France, Luxem-

bourg, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway,Sweden, Turkey, Union of South Africa, United King-dom.Abstaining: Bolivia, Chile, Denmark, Dominican Re-

public, Greece, Honduras, Iceland, Nica-ragua, Peru, United States.

The text (334(IV) ) was as follows:"The General Assembly,"Having regard to the obligation to transmit infor-

mation under Article 73 e of the Charter accepted bythe Members which have or assume responsibilities forthe administration of territories whose peoples have notyet attained a full measure of self-government,

"Having regard to resolution 66(I) adopted by theGeneral Assembly on 14 December 1946 in whichseventy-four territories were enumerated, in accordancewith the declarations of the responsible Governments,as falling within the scope of Article 73 e,

"Having noted the information supplied by certainMembers concerning the constitutional changes whichhave led to the cessation of the transmission of infor-mation under Article 73 e in respect of certain territorieswhich were enumerated in resolution 66(I),

"1. Considers that it is within the responsibility ofthe General Assembly to express its opinion on theprinciples which have guided or which may in futureguide the Members concerned in enumerating the terri-tories for which the obligation exists to transmit infor-mation under Article 73 e of the Charter;

"2. Invites any special committee which the GeneralAssembly may appoint on information transmitted underArticle 73 e of the Charter to examine the factors whichshould be taken into account in deciding whether anyterritory is or is not a territory whose people have notyet attained a full measure of self-government."

3. Revision of the Standard form

In resolution 221(III) of 3 November 1948,the General Assembly invited the specialized


agencies to examine the sections of the StandardForm with which they are specially concerned,with a view to the revision of this Form.

Secretariat conversations between the UnitedNations and FAO resulted in a redrafting of thepassage in the Standard Form relating to agri-culture. The ILO indicated that it would bepreferable not to change the section relating tolabour, since Governments supply ILO with aconsiderable amount of information which couldbe made available to the United Nations. UNESCOhad prepared detailed suggestions for revision ofthe section on education, and WHO had ap-pointed three experts to meet in September 1949to examine the health section of the StandardForm.

In the discussion of this question in the SpecialCommittee, the United States representative, sup-ported by the representative of the United King-dom, advised against revision in 1949, on theground that the territorial officers were just begin-ning to become familiar with the Standard Formand changes at that time would create some con-fusion. The Committee agreed to leave the ques-tion of revision open for consideration in 1950.

4. Information Voluntarily Transmitted

As mentioned above, the Standard Form for theguidance of the eight Members concerned in pre-paring information on Non-Self-Governing Terri-tories under their administration contains anoptional part relating to general information, withheadings on geography, history, people, governmentand human rights. This optional part had beencovered in the information transmitted in 1948by Australia, Denmark, New Zealand, the Nether-lands and the United States with respect to theTerritories administered by them, and, with respectto Morocco and Tunisia, in the information trans-mitted by France. Members not transmittinginformation under the optional category of theStandard Form held that there was no obligationto include data on constitutional developmentsaffecting the government of the Territories undertheir jurisdiction, since Article 73 e mentionedspecifically only information on economic, socialand educational conditions. This resulted in theomission of other subjects covered in the optionalpart of the Standard Form and unrelated to thequestion of the transmission of political informa-tion. In paragraph 5 ( c ) of resolution 218(III),the Assembly, on 3 November 1948, asked theSecretary-General to invite the Members whichhad not provided general information neverthelessto supply such information in relation to questions

of geography, history, people and human rights.8

This request was met in most cases in the infor-mation transmitted in 1949.

With regard to information on the governmentof the Territories, the General Assembly hadearlier noted, by resolution 144(II), of 3 Novem-ber 1947, that some Members had already volun-tarily transmitted information on the developmentof self-governing institutions. It considered thatthe voluntary transmission of such informationand its summarizing by the Secretary-General wereentirely in conformity with the spirit of Article73 of the Charter, and should be duly noted andencouraged.

During the third regular session of the Assemblyin 1948, the question of the transmission of politi-cal information was again discussed and the con-tending views previously expressed were repeated.At that session, however, the Assembly made nofurther recommendations on the question otherthan to invite the Secretary-General to prepareannual summaries of any information which theMembers might voluntarily transmit (resolution218(III)). The subject was again considered in1949 by the Special Committee and, during thefourth session of the Assembly, by the FourthCommittee.

In the course of the discussion in the SpecialCommittee, the representative of India proposeda resolution expressing appreciation that moreMembers had voluntarily transmitted informationunder the optional part of the Standard Form,"including in some cases information on the de-velopment of self-governing institutions", andreferring to the Assembly resolution 144(II) of1947, to the effect that the voluntary transmissionof such information was in conformity with theCharter and should be duly noted and encouragedIn its operative paragraph, the Indian draft reso-lution would have the Assembly invite "such ofthe Members as have not done so to include allsuch information in their reports to the SecretaryGeneral." The USSR representative proposed anamendment to this paragraph to make obligatorythe transmission of information on the develop-ment of organs of self-government and on thedegree of participation of the indigenous inhabi-tants in local organs of self-government.

Since some representatives argued that infor-mation voluntarily transmitted was before theCommittee for its information only and could notbe discussed, and that resolutions on the subjectcould not be considered by the Committee, a votewas taken on the question. By 7 votes to 4, theCommittee decided that it was competent.

8 See p. 722.


The Soviet amendment was rejected by 2 votesin favour to 12 against. The representative ofIndia revised his resolution, following amendmentsmoved by the representatives of China and theUnited States, and the Committee adopted therevised text by 5 votes to 3, with 8 abstentions.As revised, the operative paragraph of the draftresolution would have the Assembly express "thehope that such of the Members as have not doneso may voluntarily include such information intheir reports to the Secretary-General."

A Cuban amendment to the operative part ofthis draft resolution was presented to the FourthCommittee (A/C.4/L.2, paragraph 1). By thisamendment, the Assembly would express the hopethat Members which had not done so would volun-tarily transmit details on the government of Non-Self-Governing Territories. Further, it wouldrecommend that, when the Standard Form wasrevised, general information on geography, his-tory, people and human rights should cease to beclassified as optional.

The draft resolution proposed by the SpecialCommittee, as well as the Cuban amendment, wereopposed by several members of the Fourth Com-mittee. The representatives of Belgium, Canada,France and the United Kingdom stated that itwent beyond the Charter. They and the repre-sentatives of the Netherlands and the United Statesconsidered that the submission of such informationshould remain optional.

Other members held that information under theoptional category of the Standard Form, includinginformation on the government, was necessary fora proper appraisal of the economic, social andeducational situation in the territories.

After this discussion, the Fourth Committee,at its 117th meeting on 5 November 1949, adoptedthe Cuban amendment by 29 votes to 11, with5 abstentions. The resolution proposed by theSpecial Committee was then adopted, as amended,by 25 votes to 8, with 7 abstentions.

During a general debate on the report of theFourth Committee (A/1159), in the 162nd and163rd plenary meetings of the Assembly, oppo-sition to the resolution was again expressed bythe representatives of France, the United Kingdomand the United States on the same basis as thatexpressed in the Fourth Committee. The resolu-tion was, however, adopted by the Assembly on2 December 1949 by 33 votes to 9, with 11abstentions. It read as follows (327(IV)):

"The General Assembly,"Having noted with appreciation that more Members

responsible for the administration of Non-Self-Govern-ing Territories have voluntarily transmitted informationon the geography, history, people, government and

human rights of the Non-Self-Governing Territoriesthan in the previous year, including in some cases in-formation on the development of self-governing insti-tutions,

"Recalling the statement made in resolution 144(II),adopted by the General Assembly on 3 November 1947,that the voluntary transmission of such information andits summarizing by the Secretary-General are entirelyin conformity with the spirit of Article 73 of the Charterand should be therefore duly noted and encouraged,

"1. Recommends that, when the revision is under-taken of the Standard Form for the guidance of Mem-bers in the preparation of information to be transmittedunder Article 73 e of the Charter, general informationon geography, history, people and human rights shouldcease to be classified under the optional category of thatForm;

"2. Expresses the hope that such of the Membersas have not done so may voluntarily include detailson the government of Non-Self-Governing Territoriesin the information transmitted by them under Article73 e of the Charter."

5. Summaries and Analyses of Informa-tion Transmitted during 1949 9

The Secretary-General, in accordance with rele-vant General Assembly resolutions, summarizedthe information transmitted in 1949 with respectto each of the Non-Self-Governing Territories.

Analyses of this information were prepared, forconsideration by the Special Committee and theGeneral Assembly, on agriculture (A/917 andCorr.1), together with tables concerning agricul-ture and economic development (A/919/Add.l),on labour (A/920 and Corr.1), on public health(A/921 and Corr.1), on education (A/919) andon social welfare (A/922). A summary of pointsarising out of the analyses, as well as an analysisof aspects of general economic development, werealso prepared for consideration by the SpecialCommittee.

a. AGRICULTURAL AND ECONOMIC CONDITIONSThe analyses of agricultural and economic

development in Non-Self-Governing Territoriescovered for the most part the situation existing in1948, together with comparisons with the twoprevious years, based primarily on the informationtransmitted under Article 73 e.

In particular, an account was given of the broadlong-range plans worked out by AdministeringPowers for agricultural development, embracing

9 See: United Nations. Non-Self-Governing Territories.Summaries and analyses of information transmitted tothe Secretary-General during 1949. Lake Success, NewYork, 1950. (United Nations Publications, Sales No.:1950.VI.B.1.) Vol. I, General survey and analyses ofinformation transmitted during 1949; Vol. II, Sum-maries of information transmitted during 1949- 930 p.


soils and crops, livestock, forestry and fisheries, aswell as for the development of mineral resourcesand industries. Particular attention during 1948,it was stated, continued to be directed towardsthese development plans, financed to a substantialextent from metropolitan sources.

In the case of the United Kingdom, plans whichwere approved covered twenty-one Territoriesand provided for a total expenditure of approxi-mately £200,000,000 over a period of ten years.Of this sum, £64,000,000 was to come from metro-politan funds under the Colonial Development andWelfare Acts of 1940 and 1945, £64,000,000 fromloans, and £71,000,000 from local revenues andsurpluses. Financial settlements for war damagecompensation were reached with a number of Ter-ritories in the East, the costs of the administrationof some of the poorer Territories were met in partfrom metropolitan funds, and special assistancewas provided to meet particular difficulties, suchas the rebuilding of Belize.

Investment was also undertaken by the ColonialDevelopment Corporation to a total capital com-mitment of over £3,000,000, and the OverseasFood Corporation continued directing the EastAfrican scheme for the production of groundnuts.The Colonial Development Corporation providedassistance for gold and timber production in BritishGuiana, salt production in the Turks and CaicosIslands, sealing in the Falkland Islands, poultryand egg production in Gambia, tung growing andfisheries development in Nyasaland, and manilahemp production in North Borneo.

In a number of the French Territories, actionwas taken to establish local budgets in applicationof the French low of 30 April 1946 concerningthe plan for the development of the overseasTerritories. In French Equatorial Africa, a ten-year plan was approved, assigning approximately40 thousand million francs C.F.A. (Colonies Fran-çaises d'Afrique; 1 franc C.F.A. = 2 metropoli-tan francs) for economic development, and12,000,000 francs for social development andscience. Progress was made in the initial stagesof the implementation of development plans insome of the other Territories, notably French WestAfrica and Madagascar.

A ten-year plan of economic and social develop-ment was drawn up for the Belgian Congo. It wasstated that details of this plan were not, however, in-cluded in the information transmitted during 1949.

Rapid developments were recorded as in pro-gress in Hawaii and Puerto Rico. In Hawaii, thecost of projects planned for the immediate futureby private industry was estimated to total over$100,000,000, while public projects at a cost of

over $55,000,000 were planned. A sum of over$30,000,000 was made available for general terri-torial public works, and, in addition, there was aspecial $11,000,000 highway programme, togetherwith approximately $5,000,000 for annual im-provements. In Puerto Rico, as an incentive toprivate investment, legislation was passed in1948 exempting new industries, and a number ofothers already established, from the payment oftaxes, including income tax, for a period of twelveyears. Machinery and raw materials essential for in-dustrial use were also exempted from excise taxes.

The information transmitted indicated, as statedin the analyses, that it was still too early to assessthe results of these activities, and that the develop-ment plans were proceeding at a slower rate thanoriginally expected. Progress in plans for agri-cultural development, for example, was impeded byseveral factors, including the difficulty in obtainingcapital equipment, the shortage of qualified seniortechnicians and trained junior staff, insufficientknowledge of the potentialities of the agriculturalresources and of the natural conditions prevailing,and the rising costs which made the original esti-mates inadequate. In the face of such limitingfactors, many development plans required revision.The scope of some was reduced, the period origin-ally contemplated for others was extended, andfor still others additional funds had to be provided.

Nevertheless, it was stated on the basis of theinformation received that production in a numberof the Non-Self-Governing Territories appearedto have increased during 1948 on a scale corre-sponding to increases on a world-wide basis. Onthe other hand, the serious decline in the produc-tion of cereals in Morocco hardly seemed to havebeen arrested, while drought conditions towardsthe end of 1948 were responsible for a gravesituation in Nyasaland and East Africa generally.It was indicated that production figures were,however, uncertain, and that it was still moreuncertain whether the apparent increase in pro-duction had kept pace with the apparent increasein population.

The lack of accurate data with regard to thepopulation of Non-Self-Governing Territories,estimated to total over 200,000,000 people, wasillustrated by a comparison of information trans-mitted in 1948 and 1949 with respect to the situ-ation in Africa. With respect to French Equa-torial Africa, information transmitted in 1948estimated a population of 3,975,000 for 1947 and,for the following year, 3,430,000. In Kenya, theAfrican population was estimated in 1947 to total4,055,000; an enumeration taken in 1948 gave atotal of 5,218,000. The African population of


Uganda was estimated in 1947 at 3,878,000;according to a 1948 census, the population wasfound to be approximately 4,953,000. In thesecircumstances, it was pointed out, it was difficultto draw conclusions with regard to tentative esti-mates of the increase of production for local con-sumption in relation to population figures whichwere only beginning to approach accuracy.

It was indicated that export figures were morereliable, although these figures did not representthe actual production of export crops.

The information transmitted showed many in-creases in exports from the Territories over thethree years from 1946 to 1948. The increase incash values of exports over pre-war figures wasconsiderable, but, as stated in the analyses, oflittle real significance in view of the rise in worldprices. The volume of exports, however, althoughin some cases below pre-war totals, exceeded thepre-war maxima in many instances.

Estimated export forecasts for certain of theprincipal items in British colonial production for1952-53 as compared with previous years wereshown as follows, in units of 1,000 metric tons:

^936Groundnuts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 300Sugar . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 980Rubber . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 400Copper . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 158Bauxite . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 160Lead . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6Tin ore . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78

In the information transmitted on Morocco,the French Government reported, as a target forthe period 1949-52, the establishment of the self-sufficiency of North Africa in cereals, which hadsuffered a serious decline, and the increase inmining production of phosphates from 3,226,000to 4,000,000 tons; of iron ore from 300,000 to450,000; of manganese from 200,000 to 400,000;of coal from 300,000 to 600,000. In the case ofFrench West Africa, 1952 mineral productiontargets included increases over 1948 figures ofphosphates from 3,965 to 200,000 metric tons, andthe production of 1,200,000 metric tons of ironand 250,000 metric tons of bauxite.

Among the general export targets for Frenchoverseas territories, excluding North Africa andIndo-China, were the following, in 1,000 tons:

1938 1956Groundnuts (unshelled) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 600 1,135Bananas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .180 350Sugar . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 232 350Coffee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75 131Cocoa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95 130Cotton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15.7 62Forest products . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 358.7 2,035Gold (kilos) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6.9 31

1946335895435202

1,250(1947) 16

27

1952-53880

1,400830356

1,9503594

The volume of imports increased in almostall Territories during the three-year period from1946 to 1948, but supplies did not always meetrequirements. It was indicated that the mostserious shortage was that of textiles, the principalconsumer requirement. Although imports oftextiles increased somewhat during 1948, theyhad not reached the pre-war level. There were,however, increases over the pre-war level in thebasic imports required for the economic equip-ment of the Territories, such as machinery, iron,steel, cement and motor vehicles.

b. LABOUR CONDITIONS

The analysis of information on labour coveredemployment and unemployment, labour legisla-tion, trade unions, administrative organization andlabour disputes.

As stated in the analysis, the main features ofthe employment situation reflected in the informa-tion transmitted were: an increase in the labourrequirements of many Territories; the meeting ofthis demand in wide areas in Africa by the migrantlabour sytem which in turn deeply affected theeconomy of the rural areas; the existence in theCaribbean of a situation characterized by under-employment and seasonal unemployment, in spiteof a high labour demand; in certain cases, particu-larly in towns and among certain groups of work-ers, the emergence of an unemployment problemwhich could be relieved by a return to the land;and, almost universally, a continued shortage ofskilled and semi-skilled labour.

An outline of the more important labour legis-lation enacted during 1948 was given; it was alsoindicated that the International Labour Organisa-tion had provided for a comprehensive survey in1950 of the application of international labourconventions in Non-Self-Governing Territories.

It was indicated that there had been a steadygrowth in trade union membership and in recourseto established methods for the settlement of labourdisputes. The desirability of fostering effectiveworkers' organizations was recognized, and effortswere being made to promote trade union organi-zation and machinery for the settlement of labourdisputes, by providing, for example, facilitiesenabling workers' leaders to familiarize themselveswith advanced methods of trade union organiza-tion and labour conciliation.

The analysis included a table showing the struct-ure of the administrative services especially con-cerned with labour conditions. It was stated thatthe tendency had recently developed in the moreadvanced Territories to provide for increased


specialization to meet the growing complexity ofmodern employment, or to distinguish betweenlaw enforcement, on the one hand, and labourconciliation and the encouragement of trade union-ism on the other. The distinguishing feature ofadministrative services in the Territories, it wasindicated, was their organization according to thepolicies and practices in effect in the metropolitanareas.

Statistical information on disputes between em-ployers and workers was also provided. In general,the analysis stated, the information suggested thatlabour disputes were concerned with wage rates,including allowances for overtime, piece-workrates and other special conditions, conditions ofwork and, on occasion, the discharge of employees.In some cases, reference was made to more deep-rooted causes, such as the complexity of racialissues in Hawaii; in the Gold Coast, the scarcityof consumer goods, rising prices and the reiteratednews of labour unrest elsewhere; and politicalinterests, as in Cyprus and Malaya.

c. PUBLIC HEALTH

The analysis on public health indicated thatthe shortage of medical personnel of all typeswas an outstanding problem. Taking a broadinterpretation of the term physician, and bearingin mind the approximate estimate by WHO thatthe northern zone (North America, Europe,USSR) of the world had one physician to about1,200 inhabitants, it was noted that the ratio inCaribbean Territories ranged from approximatelyone physician to 1,800 inhabitants to one physi-cian in 4,500 inhabitants. In industrial Territoriesin the Far East, the ratio appeared to lie betweenone in 4,000 and one in 4,500. In agriculturalTerritories in the Far East, the ratio ranged fromone physician in 10,000 inhabitants to one in20,000. In Africa, the ratio was often even lower.These figures, it was further stated, had to be con-sidered in the light of geography, the location ofphysicians and hospitals, and means of commu-nication, since these factors in most cases madethe task of the few physicians even more difficult.

A preliminary review of the medical trainingprovided in a number of the Non-Self-GoverningTerritories was given in the analysis, with someinformation on the extent to which medical train-ing in the metropolitan and other countries wasbeing offered to students from the Territories.Medical training leading to qualifications generallyaccepted as a full medical standing was beingprovided in 1948 in Hong Kong, Singapore, Indo-nesia and Surinam, and in 1949 the courses were

established in Nigeria, Jamaica and Puerto Rico;other institutions were expected to reach similarstandards within a few years. Of similar signifi-cance, it was indicated, in view of the urgent needfor trained medical staff to treat the most commondiseases, were the medical schools which providedtraining leading to responsible positions but notto full medical qualifications. Such training wasbeing given, in particular, in French West Africa,the Belgian Congo, Uganda, Fiji and Guam. In allcases, these schools drew students from their re-spective regions. A number of medical studentswere also working for degrees in the metropolitaninstitutions. For example, in 1948, fifty studentsfrom French African Territories were holdingmedical scholarships in France.

While the vital statistics given in the analysison public health and in the summaries of informa-tion from the various Territories indicated theneed for increased medical assistance in the Terri-tories in general, at the same time figures forinfant mortality in many cases showed a steadydecline; in some cases the decline was substantial.Apart from the many Territories, particularly inAfrica, where mortality rates were recorded onlyin certain areas or where they were rough esti-mates, it was noted that in Cyprus the infantmortality rate for 1948 was 69.6 per thousand livebirths as compared with 159.4 in 1937; in Singa-pore, the 1948 rate was 80.8 compared with 155.2in 1937; in Trinidad, the 1948 rate was 75.5compared with 120.5 in 1937; in Puerto Rico, the1947 rate was 71.2 compared with 137.8 in 1937.Little statistical data were received with respect tothe child mortality rate for children between oneand five years of age. Figures which were obtainedfor certain United Kingdom and United StatesTerritories in the West Indies ranged between 9.6and over 30 per thousand of the child populationin this age group.

In the treatment or prevention of typical tropicaldiseases, continued progress was reported throughthe application of new techniques. The eradica-tion of malaria in Cyprus, for example, was fol-lowed by intensive campaigns in the LeewardIslands, the Windward Islands and British Guiana.In British Guiana, it was stated that 95 per centof the population had been protected againstmalaria. Medical statistics in the analysis on publichealth seemed to show the continued seriousnessof a number of tropical diseases, but it was notedthat many of the figures indicated that specialcampaigns or investigations had been undertakenrather than that the prevalence of a particulardisease had increased. The analysis stated that,nevertheless, as in all under-developed countries,


especially in the tropics, poor public health stillpresented grave problems. In many Territories,debilitating diseases, malaria in particular, werea great obstacle to the improvement of economicand social conditions, sleeping sickness paralyzeda large part of the population over a wide area inAfrica, and the tuberculosis and venereal diseaserates were often inordinately high.

d. EDUCATION

The information transmitted on elementaryeducation, according to the analysis, indicated thatit had been possible to establish the principle ofcompulsory school attendance in a number ofTerritories in the Caribbean, in Greenland, Hawaii,the Cook Islands and Brunei, and that there was amarked increase in school enrolment; in Malaya,for example, the total enrolment in 1948 wasnearly double the pre-war peak. At the sametime, a discrepancy between attendance and en-rolment, and a considerable degree of wastageduring the primary school course even in the moreadvanced Territories indicated that education forthe mass of the children was not yet effective.This situation was not limited to Non-Self-Govern-ing Territories, the analysis pointed out, butapplied to under-developed areas in general.

It was noted, however, that an outstandingadvance was made during 1948 in a number ofNon-Self-Governing Territories through the estab-lishment or rehabilitation of local institutions ofhigher learning. In October 1948, universitycolleges were opened in the Gold Coast, Nigeriaand Jamaica to serve the United Kingdom Terri-tories in their respective regions. Marked pro-gress was made towards university college statusby the institutions existing in Uganda and Malayawhile the University of Hong Kong, which wasre-established after the war, was operating fullyby the end of 1948 in the fields of medicine,engineering, the arts and science. In the FrenchTerritories, in addition to the established Frenchand Arabic institutions of higher learning in NorthAfrica, institutions of higher education madeprogress in French West Africa and Madagascar.In the former Territory, a university centre, des-tined to become a full university by 1955, wasopened. In Madagascar, the law school, which wasopened in 1947, was to be converted into aninstitution offering higher courses in law, ethnol-ogy, languages and economic geography. Amongother developments, a law school was opened in1948 in Surinam; and in Puerto Rico, full medicaltraining was inaugurated at the existing universityLastly, in the Belgian Congo, the Government

was examining a plan for the early organization ofa centre of higher education; in the past, attentionhad been directed principally towards elementaryeducation.

To provide the people of the Territories withaccess to world centres of learning, it was pointedout, was a parallel need in connexion with highereducation. Although complete figures were notobtained, the analysis on education indicated thatthere was an increasing flow of students fromNon-Self-Governing Territories to universities andother institutions of higher learning both in themetropolitan countries and elsewhere. By early1949, for example, there were over 3,400 colonialstudents in the United Kingdom; among FrenchTerritories there were, in 1948, 164 students fromFrench West Africa and 134 from Madagascarholding scholarships at French institutions ofhigher education.

The analysis indicated that the effect of in-sufficient education was to some extent responsiblefor difficulties of economic development. Inagriculture, it was stated, the needs and possibilitiesof the Non-Self-Governing Territories were not yetsurveyed with sufficient accuracy to enable develop-ment to proceed on firm foundations. That thiswas recognized, the analysis stated, was illustratedby the United Kingdom grants under the ColonialDevelopment and Welfare Acts for agricultural,veterinary, forestry and fisheries research. From1940 to 1947, a total of approximately £1,032,000was allocated for these purposes. During the one-year period from 1 April 1947 to 31 March 1948,the total sum allocated was £1,468,000. But, theanalysis pointed out, British and also French expe-rience indicated that the senior research workersneeded to carry out extensive research were inshort supply, and in some cases assistance wassought from United States geologists and agri-culturists for surveys in Africa.

Seriously retarding factors in the productionof crops, the improvement of methods of culti-vation, the protection of soil fertility, the improve-ment of livestock and the overcoming of prejudicesfatal to increased productivity, the analysis ex-plained, were the educational and cultural defi-ciencies of the populations. While attention waspaid to agricultural education in the schools andextension work for adults, the analysis stated thatit was the use of modern means of mass commu-nications and the development of particular proj-ects of community improvement which appearedto have subsequently increased the effectiveness ofthe programme, thus obtaining the essential pre-requisite of indigenous leadership.

In the field of employment, it was stated that a


similar situation was apparent in the requirementboth for leaders in industry and industrial rela-tions and for a vastly increased supply of manualworkers with some degree of skill in the use ofmodern machinery. The analysis indicated thatof perhaps particular significance was the increasedaction taken in 1948 to provide wide experiencein trade union administration both for indigenoustrade union leaders and for labour officers of theGovernment. With regard to the training ofworkers, information was supplied on the exten-sion of existing technical training institutions, asin the Caribbean and in West and East Africa,but the information transmitted, according to theanalysis, said little on training within industry tomeet the immediate needs of the new economicprojects.

e. SOCIAL WELFARE

The analysis on social welfare aimed at giving ageneral survey of those policies pursued by theAdministering Powers which determined the dom-inant trends in their social welfare activities, anda description of public assistance measures forold persons and for children.

The need for social welfare conceived as aspecific and necessary function of government wasrecognized and, in a number of Territories, thisrecognition had led to the formation of social wel-fare policies and special administrative machinery,and to the establishment or reorganization ofappropriate services. While the basic conceptsof social welfare differed and were sometimesvague, the analysis stated, the following trends ap-peared to gain in importance and precision in theareas where general policies had emerged fromthe preliminary stage: (1) development of pub-lic social security measures; (2) youth welfare,with particular regard to the problems of juveniledelinquency; and (3) promotion of indigenousparticipation and leadership in activities aimedat social improvement.

In the areas where public relief existed, theanalysis indicated that the principles and cover-age varied widely, ranging from a recognition ofthe right of every individual to a sufficient mini-mum income, to provision for public relief onlyin cases of complete destitution and disability andto relief only for exceptional categories; rates ofassistance were not in proportion to regionaldifferences in the cost of living.

The state of old age assistance, the analysispointed out, usually reflected the provisions of thegeneral poor relief. In a few Territories, however,non-contributory old age pensions or old age

payments based on a means test were introduced;these Territories, the information transmitted indi-cated, showed the highest proportions of recipientsof general assistance and, within the groups ofTerritories under the same Power, the highestaverage rates of payment to the average recipient.

In most Territories, the analysis stated, the provi-sion of assistance to needy children was left tocharitable organizations and missionary societies.In others, it was granted under the terms of gen-eral poor relief, largely to orphans and desertedchildren. Only in a few Territories were definiterates of assistance granted for dependent children,to supplement the deficient income of theirfamilies.

The problem of homeless or destitute children,it was stated, while not absent from other areas,was particularly acute in the war-stricken areas.The main form of protection for these children con-tinued to be an orphanage, or similar institute, inmost cases administered by missionary or charitablebodies and subsidized by the administration.

Lack of financial resources, it was explained,constituted a primary obstacle to the developmentof a vigorous social welfare policy in most Terri-tories. In many cases, however, progress was de-layed by the shortage of trained personnel.

In some of the Territories, the analysis revealed,the promotion of indigenous initiative and leader-ship received particular attention, being directedchiefly towards the development of modern com-munal institutions and services, and the spirit ofself-help and self-determination in the ruralcommunities.

f. INTERNATIONAL CO-OPERATION

Information before the Special Committee in1949 indicated that international and regional dis-cussions and co-operation played an increasingpart in the development of co-ordinated economicand social programmes in the Non-Self-GoverningTerritories. Technical meetings held by the Statesconcerned to examine problems common to severalof the Non-Self-Governing Territories and inde-pendent countries included the following.

Two conferences were held in Nairobi, Kenya,in October 1948, to develop a co-ordinated cam-paign to eliminate rinderpest (cattle-plague). Thefirst was organized by the United Kingdom andthe second was held under the auspices of FAO.A conference of the International Scientific Com-mittee for Trypanosomiasis (sleeping sickness)was held in London in February 1949. In Novem-ber 1948, a conference on soil conservation washeld at Goma, Belgian Congo; it recommended


the establishment of an information bureau onsoil conservation in African Territories. Thiswas followed by meetings in Paris in January1949, and the work was further advanced by twoconferences later held at Jos, Nigeria, in Novem-ber 1949. The first of these conferences, attendedby delegations from the British African Territories,considered questions of land reclamation andsettlement schemes, the conservation of watersupplies, trypanosomiasis control, land tenure, co-operative societies and livestock development. Thesecond, to consider the indigenous rural economy,was also attended by representatives of the BritishAfrican Territories and, in addition, by repre-sentatives of France and French African Terri-tories, Belgium and the Congo, the Union of SouthAfrica, Southern Rhodesia, and Portugal andPortuguese colonial territories. In September 1949,a conference of directors of medical services washeld at Nairobi. At Dschang, in the Cameroonsunder French administration, an Inter-Africanconference on food and nutrition was held inOctober.

In March 1949, an international conventionproviding for the establishment of an InternationalCouncil for the Control of the Red Locust wassigned in London on behalf of Belgium, SouthernRhodesia, the Union of South Africa and theUnited Kingdom. Headquarters of the Councilwere later established at Abercorn, NorthernRhodesia. An Inter-African permanent office forthe control of trypanosomiasis and the tsetse flywas being established at Leopoldville, in theBelgian Congo, following a decision made atBrazzaville, French Equatorial Africa, in February1948. An anti-locust conference was held atDakar in May 1949.

Inter-colonial collaboration in Africa was alsoreflected in the Anglo-Belgian Fisheries Confer-ence, held at Elizabethville in June 1949, the Cen-tral African Transport Conference at Lisbon inMay 1949, a West African Conference on labourproblems at Jos in February 1948, and a more gen-eral conference, the African Regional ScientificConference, held on the invitation of the Union ofSouth Africa at Johannesburg in October 1949.

The specialized agencies were associated in sev-eral of the above meetings, as well as in the con-ference of the African Postal and Telecommunica-tions Union, held at Capetown in November 1948,and the London Conference on Civil Aviation inAfrica, held in March 1949.

In the East, the International Rice Commissionand the Indo-Pacific Fisheries Council met inMarch 1949 at Bangkok and Singapore, respec-tively, and the International Forestry and Timber

Utilization Conference was held at Mysore inMarch and April 1949. Questions considered bythe semi-official Pacific Science Congress, held inNew Zealand in February 1949, included welfareproblems of the indigenous population of theTerritories in the Pacific. At meetings in Singa-pore in September and October 1949, the prob-lem of technical training in the Far East was con-sidered by ILO, and a wide programme of agri-cultural problems were dealt with jointly by FAOand the Economic Commission for Asia and theFar East (ECAFE), in which a number of Non-Self-Governing Territories participate as associatemembers. The South Pacific Commission ResearchCouncil met from 30 April to 9 May 1949, andthe Commission itself held its third session atits permanent headquarters at Noumea, New Cale-donia, in May 1949. It approved thirty researchprojects in the fields of health, economic and so-cial development. The Commission also adopteda resolution relating to technical assistance re-quired in the area, and the part which it shouldplay in this matter.

In the Caribbean, the third session of the WestIndian Conference of the Caribbean Commissionmet in Guadeloupe in December 1948. It was at-tended by delegates from the Caribbean Terri-tories of the member governments and by ob-servers from the Governments of Canada, Cuba,the Dominican Republic and Haiti, the UnitedNations and the International Labour Office. TheConference dealt primarily with industrial devel-opment and economic productivity. The questionscovered included trade statistics and information,the industrial development survey of the Carib-bean, the regional development of tourism, re-search activities, transport and communications,migrant labour and labour conditions, and organ-ization and legislation.

Finally, direct international assistance has beenextended to some of the Territories throughUNICEF, in collaboration with WHO. This assist-ance includes a feeding programme, granting offellowships for health and social welfare workers,provision of public health personnel and anti-tuberculosis campaigns.

6. Discussion in 1949 in the SpecialCommittee on the Secretary-General'sSummaries and Analyses of Information

The discussions on the summaries and analysesof information covered points on which it wassuggested that more ample data were desired inthe future information to be transmitted by the


Members concerned, and in the future analyses tobe prepared by the Secretary-General; the discus-sions also covered points concerning the relation-ship of the specialized agencies to this generalsubject.

The representative of the USSR considered thatthe summaries and analyses as a whole were in-adequate because the information transmitted bythe Administering Members was incomplete andomitted data on many important points. He statedthat there was almost no information on the devel-opment of self-government or on the degree ofparticipation of the indigenous inhabitants in thelocal organs of government. The information oneconomic, social and educational conditions wasfar too general to be satisfactory; to illustrate thispoint, he made a number of specific references tothe information transmitted.

The USSR representative also charged that theAdministering Authorities were not abiding bytheir obligations under Article 73 of the Charter.In the economic field, these Members, and inparticular the United Kingdom, France and Bel-gium with respect to their African dependencies,pursued a policy of exploitation unrelated to theinterests of the indigenous populations. Vast landswere leased out to monopolistic companies, whichexploited them for such agricultural and indus-trial purposes as were likely to yield maximumprofits. Medical services were inadequate and themortality rate, particularly among children, wasvery high, as was the incidence of social diseases.In the case of some Territories, there was no rec-ord of vital statistics. This, he felt, was indicativeof lack of interest on the part of the Administer-ing Authority for the welfare of the people. Fur-ther, the number of doctors and hospitals was neg-ligible in all Territories. Statistics on educationshowed very low literacy percentages in a num-ber of Territories, and complete illiteracy of theindigenous population in the rest. Comparing theamounts per capita spent on the elementary educa-tion of local and European children, it becameclear, he stated, that there was gross discrimina-tion against the indigenous population, and thatthe facilities made available to them for second-ary schooling were virtually non-existent. Therewas, he noted, scarcely any reference to indigenousinhabitants who had received a higher education.The representative of the USSR expressed doubtsthat the claim could be made that the Administer-ing Authorities provided justice for the popula-tions of the Territories, or protected them againstabuses. In the light of the inadequate informationit could justifiably be said that a policy of dis-

crimination against the indigenous inhabitants waspractised.

In reply to these statements, the representativeof the United Kingdom affirmed that the principlesdeclared in Chapter XI of the Charter had beenobserved by his Government long before the crea-tion of the United Nations, and that the UnitedKingdom was proud of its colonial record. Hedenied that anything in this Chapter required theUnited Kingdom to account to the United Na-tions for the administration of its Territories. Forthis reason, he stated, he was not called upon todefend the colonial policy of his Government butwished to correct certain misunderstandings.Chapter XI was merely a statement of policy. Thesole obligation of the Administering Authoritiestowards the United Nations was contained inArticle 73e and consisted of the transmission regu-larly of information on the social, economic andeducational conditions in the Non-Self-GoverningTerritories. This information was sent for infor-mation purposes only and was never intended tobe the subject matter of discussion or an excusefor propaganda attacks. The representative of theUnited Kingdom considered that the remarks ofthe representative of the USSR were full of con-traditions and contained several misstatements offacts, and he gave several illustrations to supportthis statement. In reply to the contention of therepresentative of the USSR that the Administer-ing Authorities were not implementing the prin-ciples of Chapter XI, the United Kingdom wassatisfied that, having regard to the many difficul-ties with which it was faced and the comparativelyshort time in which to overcome them, it haddone at least as well as any other nation wouldhave done.

Other members of the Committee also called at-tention to the limitations in the information trans-mitted regarding economic, social and educationalconditions, and made suggestions which they feltwould further the development of the Territories.

a. AGRICULTURECommenting on the information concerning

agriculture, the representative of the United Statesstated that progress in this field was hamperedby insufficient scientific research and lack of per-sonnel; in this connexion, he congratulated boththe Governments of the United Kingdom andFrance on the establishment of research centres.He suggested that a study be made of the facilitiesfor agricultural education and extension servicesfor farmers in the Territories.

The representative of India observed that theinformation on agriculture showed that food short-


ages were due to insufficient production, primi-tive methods and pests. He indicated his desirefor more information on the shift from cash tofood crops and on the extent to which moderntechniques such as mechanical equipment and fer-tilizers were being used in agriculture. He wasalso interested in the problems of soil erosion andland reclamation, and thought that FAO mightbe invited to gather more information on thesetwo questions in the Territories. He pointed outa need for better statistical methods. In view ofthe shortage of agricultural research workers andthe time needed to train the indigenous inhabitants,he would like FAO to consider whether a bureauof European and non-European specialists mightbe organized for service in the Territories. He in-dicated that there were a number of retired offi-cials of experience in India who might be willingto work elsewhere, and pointed out that in themajority of the Non-Self-Governing Territories,agricultural extension work could possibly be donebetter by non-Europeans.

The representative of the Dominican Republicsaid that his Government would also like to co-operate and assist in programmes of agriculturaldevelopment; he stressed the importance of inter-national collaboration in this field, and drew at-tention to the need for improving at the same timethe social conditions and standards of living inthe Territories.

b. LABOUR CONDITIONS

With reference to the analysis of labour condi-tions, the representative of India observed thatthere was no information on the fixing and pay-ment of wages, nor was there any indicationwhether workers in seasonal industries received un-employment pay during the off-season, whetherwage levels had risen in proportion to the costof living, or whether workers were obliged to in-cur debts. He stated that it was encouraging tonote the growth in trade unions and the increasein labour legislation on the statute books, but feltit would be interesting to ascertain how many fac-tories were inspected, the qualifications of the in-spectors, the punishment for violations, and theactual number of prosecutions. He called atten-tion to the intensive recruitment of labour in cer-tain parts of Africa which attracted too large aproportion of the male population to labourcentres, whereas it was necessary to retain enoughmen in the tribes and villages to perpetuate therace and to perform local work. He consideredthat more information was needed on these twoproblems and that ILO should study them. The

representative of Egypt agreed with these com-ments on the subject of migrant labour; he re-called that ILO had undertaken a study of thisproblem and hoped that the Committee wouldbe informed of its findings.

The Committee's discussion of health conditionsin the Territories centred on the lack of trainedpersonnel. The representative of India stated thathe would like the World Health Organization tostudy, with respect to the Non-Self-GoverningTerritories, the diseases caused by malnutrition,and the training and utilization of indigenous per-sonnel. He complained that the information onvital statistics was unsatisfactory, and pointed outthat it would be worth while to invite WHO toassist in the improvement of the statistical workin all the Territories. Information describing thepublic health systems was too limited, in his esti-mation, and there was no analysis of nutrition.With regard to the training of medical assistants,the representative of the United States observedthat the analysis indicated a tendency to stress thenecessity for a high standard of preliminary educa-tion. He informed the Committee that in Guamhis Government had found that natives with lim-ited educational background could be trained asmedical and dental assistants, with sufficient tech-nical knowledge to provide these services to theirvillages. The representative of China observed thatthere was no information on the extent to whichthe lack of trained personnel and medical equip-ment was being remedied by the use of doctorsfrom displaced persons camps. He also referredto the possibility of employing in the Territoriesdoctors with foreign degrees. The representativeof Belgium explained that the shortage of person-nel and medical equipment was due as much tothe impossibility of providing technical trainingof medical personnel as to the inadequate finan-cial resources of the Territories in question. Theproblem, he stated, was one of increasing the pro-ductivity of labour and raising the national in-come. Both he and the representative of the UnitedKingdom stressed the fact that this situation wasnot limited to Non-Self-Governing Territories butexisted in all under-developed countries, and shouldtherefore be studied on a world-wide basis. Therepresentative of the United Kingdom agreed thatit was essential to train indigenous personnel toassist in the public health programmes; as anexample, he mentioned Cyprus, where teams ofindigenous personnel had conducted a successfulCampaign against malaria. The representative ofthe Dominican Republic considered that his coun-try could provide an interesting example in theutilization of comparative data on public health.


He proposed that the Special Committee recom-mend that WHO study the establishment of uni-versal standards which would make possible theimprovement of public health services in the Ter-ritories.

c. EDUCATION

With respect to the analysis of information oneducation, the representative of Egypt drew atten-tion to the fact that there were certain Territorieswhere primary education had not yet been madecompulsory, that in certain other Territories itwas not strictly observed, while in Kenya andNorthern Rhodesia, primary education was com-pulsory for Europeans only. The statistics showedthat a high percentage of children received elemen-tary education, but that few received secondaryand higher education; he expressed the hope thatthe Administering Powers would do more in thefield of education, including the expansion ofhigher education and technical training. Accordingto the representative of the United States, a moredetailed study should be made of higher and tech-nical education and of mass education programmes.The representative of the Dominican Republic ob-served that the information illustrated the lowdegree of school attendance. Programmes to com-bat illiteracy should be put into effect in the Non-Self-Governing Territories, and, he complained, nodefinite plans in this connexion had been revealedin the information. He believed that UNESCOshould be invited to prepare and submit to theGeneral Assembly a general plan for a uniformcampaign against illiteracy in all the Territories,and this plan could then be presented to the Ad-ministering Authorities for their consideration.The Venezuelan representative, describing educa-tion as the corner-stone of any sincere effort tofurther the progress of the indigenous populations,warmly supported all measures directed towardsthe establishment of compulsory education. Hedrew attention to situations in which the dispro-portion in the education of boys and girls shouldbe corrected and to the importance of obtainingthe widest possible participation by indigenousteachers.

In connexion with the question of education inthe Territories, several members of the SpecialCommittee called attention to the need for greateruse of the vernacular in the schools. The repre-sentative of Egypt recalled that in 1948 the Nether-lands representative had proposed in the SpecialCommittee that UNESCO study the problem ofthe language of instruction in elementary educa-tion. He stated that he had taken all his higher

education in Arabic, and that the French Gov-ernment could find Arabic teachers in Syria, Leb-anon and Egypt to teach in the Arabic language inMorocco and Tunisia. The representative ofChina, who complained that the information trans-mitted on educational conditions was insufficientas a whole, stated that it did not give sufficientdetails of the time devoted to the study of thevernacular or of the proportion of teachers drawnfrom the local population. Inhabitants of the Ter-ritories should be enabled to study in their mothertongue. He observed that, in the analysis of educa-tional data, it was stated that in French EquatorialAfrica the policy was to use only French as thelanguage of instruction and to prohibit teachingin the local dialects in all public and privateschools.

The representative of France stated that thepolicy of his Government was to teach the vernac-ular on the same footing as French in thoseTerritories where a lingua franca existed, as, forexample, the teaching in Arabic in North Africa.In Territories such as French Equatorial Africa,however, where the dialects often varied from vil-lage to village, and in French West Africa, wherethe situation was even worse, it was necessary touse a common language of instruction, and Frenchhad been chosen as that language. This choice, hestated, was solely for practical reasons. Educationin the indigenous language was not prohibited.He also drew attention to the dangers that wouldarise if pupils were segregated on a linguisticbasis.

The representative of Venezuela, stating thathe recognized the difficulties of selecting a lan-guage of instruction, nevertheless considered thatthe widest possible use should be made of the homelanguage of the pupils, particularly in primary andsecondary schools.

d. SOCIAL WELFARE

Referring to the analysis in regard to social wel-fare problems, the representative of the UnitedStates noted with satisfaction the widespread rec-ognition of the need to solve such problems. Heexpressed disappointment, however, at the lack ofcomparative data from independent countries inthe analysis, and commented on the planning be-ing carried out by the Governments of Belgiumand the United Kingdom in the field of social wel-fare. He agreed with the view expressed in the in-formation transmitted by the United Kingdom thatit was necessary to help the indigenous society forma broader concept of its own responsibilities. Hepointed out that the United States Territories of


Alaska, Hawaii, Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islandsplanned and administered their own social welfareprogrammes through departments headed by, andstaffed with, local personnel. He emphasized thatthe United States Federal Social Security Act ap-plied in its entirety to Hawaii and Alaska, and thatsome provisions extended to Puerto Rico and theVirgin Islands. He considered that the primaryneeds in the social welfare field were additionalfinances and the acceleration of training pro-grammes. In this connexion, he suggested thatstudies be made of the methods used in trainingindigenous welfare workers, and of the causes, pre-vention and treatment of juvenile delinquency.

The representative of India asked that informa-tion on housing conditions and programmes be in-cluded in the next analysis prepared on social wel-fare problems.

e. OTHER QUESTIONS

With regard to the summaries and analyses ingeneral, the representatives of Belgium and theUnited Kingdom considered their value seriouslyreduced by the omission of comparative data. Theyobserved that the problems outlined with respectto Non-Self-Governing Territories were not pecu-liar to these Territories, as such, but were commonto many under-developed independent countries.Particular reference was made to the analyses pre-pared on agriculture and health. These representa-tives considered that the problems outlined weretechnical and could better be studied by the special-ized agencies than by a body such as the SpecialCommittee, and that no useful work could be doneif the examination of social and economic prob-lems was limited to Non-Self-Governing Terri-tories.

The representative of India did not agree thatthe specialized agencies should have responsibilityfor an exclusive study of functional fields with re-spect to the Non-Self-Governing Territories. Hefelt, rather, that they should be entrusted with thetask of drawing comparisons, and that they mightsupplement the information before the Committeeby submitting their comments on the summariesand analyses prepared by the Secretary-General.The representative of Egypt stated that there wasnothing in Article 73 which required comparisonof the information transmitted on Non-Self-Gov-erning Territories with relevant information fromindependent countries. This, he considered, wasa function of the Economic and Social Councilwhich could not be discharged by the Special Com-mittee. He indicated that it would be better tosend United Nations missions to all countries, in-

dependent and Non-Self-Governing, to make com-parisons on the spot.

The representative of Australia thought theCommittee might consider whether it would takeany further steps to assist the specialized agenciesin correlating their activities with those of theCommittee. The relationship had been outlined ingeneral terms and, although it would be difficult,he felt that an attempt should be made to makethat relationship more specific. He regarded theCommittee as an intermediary between the special-ized agencies and the General Assembly, and de-sired to see the agencies use the Committee assuch. The Special Committee, he suggested, coulddraw the attention of the Economic and SocialCouncil to the needs of Non-Self-Governing Terri-tories in relation to the technical assistance pro-gramme, and the agencies could be requested toinform the Secretary-General of the technicalassistance given to the Non-Self-Governing Terri-tories.

The representatives of ILO, FAO, UNESCO andWHO, who took part in the discussions and de-scribed the work of their organizations to the Com-mittee, expressed appreciation of the informationcontained in the summaries and analyses, and de-clared that it was the intention of their agenciesto collaborate with the United Nations. The repre-sentatives of WHO and UNESCO indicated that,if further invitations were addressed to their agen-cies, the character of the work asked of them shouldbe defined as dearly as possible.

Reference to the activities of the South PacificCommission was made by the representatives ofAustralia and New Zealand. The representative ofAustralia stated that the Commission, the scope ofwhich included a number of Non-Self-GoverningTerritories in that region, had established a pro-gramme of work that included a survey of facili-ties for professional and technical training; a studyof the best techniques for teaching, reading andwriting; a study of the types of buildings bestsuited to various climatic zones; and the use ofvisual aids in education. Projects of this type, heconsidered, should be encouraged by the SpecialCommittee. The representative of New Zealandobserved that there was no mention in the in-formation concerning agriculture of the impor-tant research work being performed by this Com-mission on a regional basis.

7. Education in Non-Self-GoverningTerritories

The Special Committee attributed considerableimportance, as stated in its report, to its discus-


sions of the Secretary-General's analysis on educa-tion, and drew up three draft resolutions on thesubject of education in the Territories.

a. EQUAL TREATMENT IN MATTERS RELATINGTO EDUCATION

The first of these resulted from a proposalmade by the representative of Egypt for the As-sembly to invite Administering Powers to removediscrimination in education between the natives ofthe Territories and the European communitiesthere. As there were some divergencies of opinion,a drafting sub-committee, composed of the repre-sentatives of China, Egypt, France and New Zea-land, was set up to prepare a revised text. TheSpecial Committee, after incorporating a draftingamendment proposed by the representative of theUnited States, adopted this text by 9 votes to 2.with 4 abstentions:

"The General Assembly"Invites the Administering Members to take steps,

where necessary, to establish equal treatment in mattersrelated to education between inhabitants of the Non-Self-Governing Territories under their administration,whether they be indigenous or not."

This resolution was considered by the FourthCommittee at its 117th meeting on 5 November1949.

The Egyptian representative, in supporting theresolution before the Fourth Committee, statedthat if the Administering States gave more educa-tional facilities to the non-indigenous than to theindigenous populations in the Territories, it wouldbe inconsistent with the principle that the inter-ests of the inhabitants should be paramount andthe principle of the equality of rights of all peoplesliving in one Territory. In reply to a statementmade in the Special Committee by the UnitedKingdom representative, he emphasized that hehad not intended to imply in the proposed resolu-tion that discrimination was deliberate. Neverthe-less it did exist, as shown by the Secretary-General'sanalysis, and it was the duty of the Fourth Com-mittee to ask the Administering Powers to abolishsuch discrimination.

A Cuban amendment (A/C.4/L.2, paragraph2) was introduced to add, at the end of the draftresolution, a paragraph, asking the AdministeringPowers to give more detailed and precise explana-tions to justify the discriminatory practices in thefield of education.

The draft resolution was opposed by the repre-sentative of the United Kingdom, who held thatit suggested that the General Assembly was in aposition to invite Administering Members to adopta certain policy in Non-Self-Governing Territories,

for which these Members had exclusive responsibil-ity. If the Committee adopted this resolution, hestated, it would indeed be interfering in a matterof domestic jurisdiction. He indicated that, in anyevent, such a resolution was unnecessary, since itinvited Administering Members to do somethingwhich they were already doing.

The representative of Belgium stated that hewould abstain from voting on the resolution, sinceit gave rise to certain difficulties of interpretation.

The representatives of Egypt, as stated above,and of France, Guatemala, Iraq and Mexico spokein favour of the draft resolution and, with the ex-ception of France, supported the Cuban amend-ment.

Following the debate, the Committee adoptedthe Cuban amendment and the draft resolution ofthe Special Committee, as amended, by roll callvotes of 34 to 1 (Belgium), with 12 abstentions,and 42 to 1 (United Kingdom), with 4 absten-tions, respectively. On 2 December 1949, the As-sembly, by 44 votes to 1, with 7 abstentions,adopted this resolution without change (328-(IV)), as follows:

"The General Assembly"1. Invites the Administering Members to take steps,

where necessary, to establish equal treatment in mat-ters related to education between inhabitants of theNon-Self-Governing Territories under their administra-tion, whether they be indigenous or not;

"2. Invites the Administering Members, in caseswhere for exceptional reasons educational facilities ofa separate character are provided for different communi-ties, to include in the information transmitted underArticle 73 e of the Charter full data on the costs andmethods of financing the separate groups of educationalinstitutions."

b. LANGUAGE OF INSTRUCTION IN NON-SELF-GOVERNING TERRITORIES

Following a proposal by the Egyptian repre-sentative on the Special Committee, a drafting sub-committee prepared a draft resolution invitingUNESCO, in collaboration with the AdministeringMembers, to study the question of preserving anddeveloping indigenous languages, and the extentto which such languages could be used as the lan-guage of instruction in schools.

This draft was adopted by the Special Commit-tee, together with two amendments: a UnitedStates proposal that UNESCO, in a studying thisquestion, take account of the experience of otherStates; and a New Zealand proposal expressing thehope that Administering Members would collabo-rate with UNESCO.

There was considerable discussion in the FourthCommittee with respect to this resolution, con-


sidered at the 119th and 120th meetings of theCommittee on 8 and 9 November 1949. Duringthis discussion, the representatives of the UnitedKingdom and France outlined their policies andpractice for developing the use of indigenous lan-guages in the Territories.

The United Kingdom representative explainedthat his Government was making every effort toencourage the use of vernacular languages. Elemen-tary instruction, he stated, was given in the vernac-ular wherever possible, but, in view of its limitedvocabulary, it could not be used in secondary andhigher schools. He also pointed out some of theproblems, including financial difficulties, whicharose in connexion with the use of indigenous lan-guages. With regard to the draft resolution of theSpecial Committee, he considered that, by confin-ing UNESCO's study to Non-Self-Governing Ter-ritories, it discriminated between these Territoriesand sovereign States.

The French representative stated that in Terri-tories under his Government's administration in-digenous languages, if they were highly developedor represented an ancient civilization, were alwaysused as the medium of instruction for elementaryeducation and were treated on an equal footingwith French for secondary and higher education.This was done in the case of the Arabic, MalagasyAnnamese, Cambodian and Lao languages. Whenthere were, on the other hand, a large number ofdifferent languages and dialects, which were oftennot understood in neighbouring villages, instruc-tion was not given in the local language. Hepointed out, as did several other representatives inthe Committee, that the people in many areas hadobjected to the use of the vernacular for instruc-tion purposes; in many cases, the exclusive use ofthe vernacular would retard political developmentand might lead to the cultural isolation of the in-digenous people. Going on to discuss the draftresolution, the French representative stated thatalthough the request for assistance from UNESCOshould emanate from the Administering Powersrather than from the United Nations, he was pre-pared to accept it, provided the study to be under-taken by UNESCO should be on a world-widebasis.

The draft resolution was eventually adopted bythe Fourth Committee by a roll-call vote of 28 to3, with 15 abstentions, subject to a Yugoslavamendment asking UNESCO to study particularlymeasures which might be taken to accelerate theuse of local languages in schools (A/C.4/L.45/-Rev.l), and a Syrian amendment recommendingto the Administering Powers to promote the useof the local languages, to make them, whenever

possible, the languages of instruction, and to in-form the Secretary-General on the scope and re-sults of such steps (A/C.4/L.44).

The General Assembly, at its 263rd plenarymeeting on 2 December 1949, also adopted theresolution, without change, by a vote of 34 to 4,with 13 abstentions. The text follows (329 ( IV)) :

"The General Assembly,"Recognizing the importance of preserving and de-

veloping the languages of the indigenous peoples ofthe Non-Self-Governing Territories, and

"Noting the appreciable steps already taken in thisconnexion by the Administering Members,

"1. Invites the Administering Members"(a) To promote the use of the indigenous languages

in the Territories under their administration;"(b) To make these languages where and when-

ever possible the languages of instruction in elementary,primary and secondary schools, without prejudice tothe use of any other language;

"(c) To include in their reports to the Secretary-General information on the scope and results of suchsteps;

"2. Invites the United Nations Educational, Scientificand Cultural Organization to undertake an over-allstudy of the question, more particularly the measureswhich might be taken with a view to the speediestuse of indigenous languages as vehicles of instructionin schools, taking into consideration the desires of theinhabitants and taking account in such a study of theexperiences of other States in this matter;

"3. Expresses the hope that, in accordance with theobligation accepted under Article 73 d of the Charter,the Administering Members will collaborate with theUnited Nations Educational, Scientific and CulturalOrganization in the conduct of such a study."

c. ERADICATION OF ILLITERACY IN NON-SELF-GOVERNING TERRITORIES

A resolution on this subject was introduced inthe Special Committee by the representative ofthe Dominican Republic, and adopted by the Com-mittee by 13 votes to 1.

The draft resolution, inter alia, invited UNESCOto communicate to the Assembly in 1950 informa-tion on measures of suppressing illiteracy whichwould be of service in Non-Self-Governing Terri-tories and on the extent to which its services hadbeen provided, at the request of the Members con-cerned, in campaigns against illiteracy in theTerritories.

The resolution was considered by the FourthCommittee at its 118th meeting on 7 November1949. The representative of Cuba submitted anamendment, in order to define more closely theprocedure to be followed by UNESCO. He pro-posed that the information on measures for sup-pressing illiteracy be communicated to the Ad-ministering Authorities, and that the account ofmeasures and of the extent its services were pro-


vided be communicated to the United Nations.Furthermore, he indicated that UNESCO shouldreport annually rather than only in 1950 (A/-C.4/L.2, paragraph 3).

Both the draft resolution recommended by theSpecial Committee and the Cuban amendmentwere supported by most members of the FourthCommittee.

The United Kingdom and Belgian representa-tives, however, considered that the draft resolu-tion was unnecessary, in that programmes to re-duce illiteracy were already being carried out bythe Administering Authorities. They objected tothe resolution mainly because it ignored the factthat the eradication of illiteracy was a fundamentalproblem of sovereign States as well as of Non-Self-Governing Territories.

The Cuban amendment, with a drafting changeproposed by the representative of Guatemala, wasadopted by the Fourth Committee by a vote of35 to none, with 12 abstentions. The resolutionas a whole was then adopted, as amended, by 41votes to none, with 8 abstentions.

It was also adopted by the Assembly, on 2December 1949, by 42 votes to none, with 10 ab-stentions, as resolution 330(IV), as follows:

"The General Assembly,"Recognizing that one of the fundamental problems

in Non-Self-Governing Territories is illiteracy,"Noting that the United Nations Educational, Scienti-

fic and Cultural Organization has agreed to co-operatewith the United Nations in giving effect to the prin-ciples and obligations set forth in Chapter XI of theCharter with regard to matters affecting the well-beingand development of the peoples of Non-Self-GoverningTerritories,

"Noting that the United Nations Educational, Scienti-fic and Cultural Organization's plans for an expandedprogramme of technical assistance to under-developedcountries include the offer of advice and assistance onfundamental educational services generally, includingthe conducting of campaigns against illiteracy, the hold-ing of seminars and experimental or demonstrationprojects in fundamental education,

"Considering that the United Nations Educational,Scientific and Cultural Organization is a specializedagency qualified to study plans and to recommend themost appropriate action for the promotion, in collabora-tion with the Members concerned, of systematic cam-paigns against illiteracy,

"1. Invites the United Nations Educational, Scientificand Cultural Organization to communicate to the Ad-ministering Members full information on measures forsuppressing illiteracy which could be applied with satis-factory results in Non-Self-Governing Territories, andto communicate annually to the United Nations an ac-count of these measures and of the extent to which itsservices in campaigns against illiteracy have been pro-vided for any of the Non-Self-Governing Territoriesat the request of the Members concerned;

"2. Recommends that the Administering Memberscontinue to co-operate with the United Nations Educa-

tional, Scientific and Cultural Organization, when andwhere appropriate, with a view to the practical achieve-ment of the eradication of illiteracy in the Non-Self-Governing Territories;

"3. Invites the United Nations Educational, Scientificand Cultural Organization to take account in its studiesof the experience of various States in this matter;

"4. Invites the Secretary-General to collaborate withthe United Nations Educational, Scientific and CulturalOrganization in any necessary studies, taking as a basisthe information transmitted under Article 73 e, to-gether with any relevant supplemental information andany relevant studies undertaken by the Trusteeship Coun-cil with regard to Trust Territories."

8. International Collaboration inRelation to Economic, Social and

Educational Conditions in Non-Self-Governing Territories

The Secretariat, in accordance with General As-sembly resolution 220(III), prepared for the 1949Special Committee an outline of the activitiessince 29 August 1948 of the Economic and SocialCouncil and the regional Economic Commissionsfor Asia and the Far East and for Latin America,as these activities related to Non-Self-GoverningTerritories (A/AC.28/W.4 and Corr. 1 andAdd. 1).

The Special Committee, in 1949, also had be-fore it working papers, prepared by the Secretariat,relating to the analyses of information and thefuture work of the Secretariat and to the collabora-tion of the specialized agencies in relation to Non-Self-Governing Territories (A/AC.28/2 and Add.1, A/AC.28/7 and 9). The representative of Indiaexpressed the opinion that it was essential for theCommittee to take positive action with respect tothese documents. He accordingly presented a draftresolution on international collaboration incor-porating some of the points covered by the Secre-tariat. He suggested that, to avoid overburdeningthe Administering Powers with more inquiriesthan they could reasonably be expected to answer,the Committee should, in consultation with thespecialized agencies, select those problems in theeconomic, social and educational fields which ap-peared to require the most urgent attention. Co-operation among the Administering Authorities,which he noted was increasing, especially in eco-nomic and agricultural fields, in no way obviatedthe need for investigation by the specialized agen-cies into economic, social and educational condi-tions in the Non-Self-Governing Territories, sincethe former, he stated, were mainly concerned withthe role of the Territories in world recovery,whereas the United Nations and the specialized


agencies held that the interests of the inhabitantswere paramount.

Several textual changes were made at the sug-gestion of Committee members, and the reviseddraft resolution as a whole was adopted by 13votes to none.

The draft resolution was considered by theFourth Committee at its 118th meeting on 7 No-vember 1949. The only objection to the resolutionwas voiced by the United Kingdom representative,who held that it was unnecessary and redundant,since it drew the Assembly's attention to a seriesof problems which had been studied before andwere still under consideration, both by the Ad-ministering Powers and the specialized agenciesconcerned.

Three amendments were adopted: a Chineseamendment, to ensure that technical training facili-ties would not be limited to indigenous inhabitants,interpreted in the narrow sense of the originalinhabitants (A/C.4/L.38); a Cuban amendment(A/C.4/L.2, para.4), to provide that the special-ized agencies should make progress reports an-nually rather than only in 1950; and a draftingchange suggested by the Philippine representative.

The Committee approved the amended resolu-tion, by a roll-call vote of 38 in favour, 1 against,and 9 abstentions. Adopted without further changeby the Assembly on 2 December 1949, by a voteof 39 to 2, with 8 abstentions, the resolution(331 (IV)) read as follows:

"The General Assembly,"Having considered the summaries and analyses of

information transmitted under Article 73 e of theCharter,

"Having regard to the provisions of General Assem-bly resolutions 220(III) and 221(III) of 3 November1948 concerning respectively liaison with the Economicand Social Council and the collaboration of the spe-cialized agencies in regard to Article 73 e of the Charter,

"Having noted aspects of the programmes of theEconomic and Social Council and of the specializedagencies which include within their scope economic,social and educational conditions affecting Non-Self-Gov-erning Territories,

"1. Emphasizes the importance of promoting thetechnical training of the inhabitants of the Non-Self-Governing Territories, and requests the AdministeringMembers to co-operate when and where appropriatewith specialized international bodies with a view to ex-amining the possibility of providing adequate trainingfacilities for these inhabitants in the fields of economicdevelopment, agriculture, education, labour, public healthand social welfare;

"2. Requests the appropriate international bodies totake full account of conditions in the Non-Self-Govern-ing Territories in work undertaken by them in connexionwith economic development, the world census of agri-culture, the study of soil erosion, the training of public

health personnel, the study of problems of nutrition,the application of international labour conventions, theproblem of migrant labour in Africa, the developmentof social welfare services, the prevention and treatmentof juvenile delinquency, the study of the most appro-priate means of improving housing in tropical regions,and the problems of higher education;

"3. Invites the specialized agencies concerned to com-municate annually to the United Nations informationon the progress of the work indicated in the previousparagraph which would be of service in Non-Self-Gov-erning Territories, including information on the extentto which their services have been provided for any ofthe Non-Self-Governing Territories;

"4. Invites the specialized agencies to take accountin their studies of the experience of various States inrespect of the problems enumerated above;

"5. Invites the Secretary-General to bring to the at-tention of the Administering Members and the spe-cialized agencies concerned the comments made duringthe discussions in the Special Committee on Informa-tion transmitted under Article 73 e of the Charter in re-lation to agriculture, education, labour, public healthand social welfare;

"6. Invites the Secretary-General to collaborate withthe specialized agencies in any necessary studies, takingas a basis the information transmitted under Article 73 e,together with any relevant supplemental informationand any relevant studies undertaken by the Economicand Social Council and by the Trusteeship Council withregard to Trust Territories;

"7. Further invites the Secretary-General, in hisanalyses of information on Non-Self-Governing Terri-tories to be submitted to the General Assembly, to selectsuch aspects of economic, social and educational prob-lems as appropriately provide opportunities for possibleco-operation with the specialized international bodies, asprovided in Article 73 d of the Charter, with a view tothe improvement of economic, social and educationalconditions in the Non-Self-Governing Territories."

9. Information on TechnicalAssistance

A draft proposal, to supplement the Indian reso-lution on international collaboration, was intro-duced in the 1949 Special Committee by the Aus-tralian representative. As several representatives,including those of Belgium, France and the UnitedKingdom, asked for more time to study the draftand its implications, the Australian representativedecided to submit his draft resolution direct to theFourth Committee.

At the 127th meeting of this Committee, on 17November 1949, the Australian representativestated the purpose of his proposed text (A/C.4/-L.43 and Rev.l). It was to draw attention to reso-lution 200(III) of the Assembly10 establishing anexpanded programme of technical assistance, and

10 See pp. 437-38.


to the decision of the Economic and Social Coun-cil11 authorizing the Secretary-General to enter intonegotiations with the appropriate officers of inter-governmental regional organizations, with a view toensuring co-ordination in technical assistance activ-ities. In its operative part, the draft resolutionasked the Secretary-General to keep the SpecialCommittee informed of the nature of the technicalassistance provided by specialized internationalbodies to Non-Self-Governing Territories.

With few exceptions, members of the FourthCommittee supported the resolution and stressedthe benefits, to both the Administering Powers andthe Territories, that would result from the pro-vision of technical assistance to the Territories.The United Kingdom representative stated that hecould not vote for the resolution as it would givethe Special Committee functions far beyond thebasic provisions of Chapter XI of the Charter. Itwas the responsibility of the Administering Powersthemselves, without the interposition of the SpecialCommittee, to formulate requests for technicalassistance for the Territories.

Put to the vote, the draft resolution was adoptedby 40 votes to none, with 4 abstentions. TheFrench and Belgian representatives, who had ab-stained, explained their action as disapproval notof the resolution as a whole, but of the mentionof the Special Committee, which they consideredunconstitutional.

On 2 December 1949, at the 263rd plenarymeeting of the Assembly, the resolution obtaineda vote of 46 to 1, with 5 abstentions. It read asfollows (336(IV)):

"The General Assembly,"Noting the special interest which the members of

the Special Committee on Information transmitted underArticle 73 e of the Charter have in measures adoptedby the Governments responsible for Non-Self-GoverningTerritories concerning the economic and social welfareof the inhabitants of such Territories,

"Noting the decision of the General Assembly toestablish an expanded programme of technical assistancefor economic development through the United Nationsand certain specialized agencies, and

"Noting the decision of the Economic and SocialCouncil to authorize the Secretary-General, in consulta-tion with the specialized agencies concerned, to enterinto negotiations with appropriate officers of inter-gov-ernmental regional organizations engaged in the de-velopment of technical assistance programmes, with aview to ensuring the desirable co-ordination for thecarrying out of technical assistance activities,

"Requests the Secretary-General to keep the SpecialCommittee informed of the nature of the technical assist-ance which is accorded from time to time to Non-Self-Governing Territories by specialized internationalbodies."

10. Re-establishment of the SpecialCommittee for Three Years

When the Special Committee established by theAssembly resolution 219(III) of 3 November1948 met, from 25 August to 12 September 1949,it discussed what recommendation it should makeas to its future. Again three views were advocated:to constitute a permanent committee, a commit-tee for a period of three years, or a committee forthe year 1950. Three resolutions reflecting thesedifferent points of view were put forward in theCommittee.

A joint resolution to establish the committee ona permanent basis was proposed by the representa-tives of China, Egypt, India and Venezuela, andsupported by the representatives of Brazil and theUSSR. In favour of this resolution, it was arguedthat Chapter XI of the Charter contained obliga-tions of a permanent character both for the Ad-ministering Authorities and the United Nations;that the very existence of the Special Committeehad produced a favourable psychological effect inthe Territories, in that it constituted a guaranteethat the Administering Authorities were seriouslydischarging their obligations under Article 73;that it was also reasonable to believe that theAdministering Powers took account of the critic-isms and suggestions made in the Special Com-mittee; that the purpose of Article 73 was to enablethe Assembly to know how, and to what ex-tent, the obligations of the Administering Powerstowards Non-Self-Governing Territories were be-ing complied with; and, finally, that a permanentcommittee was essential for the effective perform-ance of the functions of the United Nations withregard to Non-Self-Governing Territories.

The representative of the United Kingdom, inopposition to this resolution, stated that it wouldbe improper for the Assembly to attempt to re-write the Charter by resolution. While specialmachinery with regard to Trust Territories wasprovided in Chapters XII and XIII of the Charter,the framers of the Charter had considered, anddeliberately rejected, an organ of supervision withregard to Non-Self-Governing Territories underChapter XI. There was nothing in the Charter,he maintained, which demanded an accounting forthese Territories. Resolutions 9(I) and 66(I),adopted by the Assembly in 1946, recognized thelimitations of Article 73 e of the Charter andsimply referred to the methods of transmitting in-formation. Finally, he stated, any suggestions asto policy in the Non-Self-Governing Territories

11 See p. 448.


would be an interference in matters which werewithin the exclusive domestic jurisdiction of theAdministering Authorities, precluded by Article2, paragraph 7, of the Charter.

The representatives of France and Belgium as-sociated themselves with this point of view, add-ing that the Administering Powers had acceptedtheir obligations under Chapter XI within theletter and spirit of its provisions. The representa-tive of France added, however, that he consideredthat the Committee had not completed its workon the procedure to be adopted for the treatmentof information transmitted under Article 73 e; hetherefore saw no objection to having the Commit-tee meet once again in 1950 to continue its con-sideration of this matter.

A draft resolution to establish the Committee fora period of three years, beginning in 1950, wasintroduced by the United States representative. Heconsidered that the achievements of the SpecialCommittee so far did not justify its establishmenton a permanent basis at that time. A further trialperiod, he felt, was desirable. Since the Commit-tee examined three types of information—eco-nomic, social and educational—it seemed practic-able to devote one year to each of these three tech-nical fields, in order to facilitate an objective andscientific examination of the information (a reso-lution providing for this concentration of effortwas later introduced in the Fourth Committee bythe representatives of Mexico and the UnitedStates). He therefore proposed the establishmentof the Committee for three years. Further, theelected members of the Committee could becomemore familiar with its work in three years, and thediscussions each year on the future of the Com-mittee would be avoided.

The representative of Belgium proposed anamendment to this resolution providing for a oneyear extension of the 1949 Special Committeewith the same terms of reference and the samemembership. Another amendment to limit theSpecial Committee to one year instead of threewas withdrawn by the French representative infavour of the Belgian proposal. The representativeof the Netherlands expressed his preference for aperiod of one year.

The representatives of Australia and New Zea-land moved that the Committee take no vote onthe three proposals but refer them directly to theAssembly for decision. Since the proponents ofthe resolutions did not withdraw them, however,a vote was taken, as required by the rules of pro-cedure.

By 6 votes in favour to 8 against, the Commit-tee rejected the joint resolution of China, Egypt,

India and Venezuela for the establishment of apermanent committee. By the same margin, theCommittee rejected the Belgian amendment tothe United States resolution to extend the exist-ing Committee for one year. The Committee thenadopted, by a roll-call vote of 8 to 4, with 4 ab-stentions, the United States draft resolution toestablish the Committee for a three-year period.

The Fourth Committee considered the questionof the future of the Special Committee at its 120thto 122nd meetings on 9 and 10 November 1949-

A proposed revised text of the draft resolutionadopted by the Special Committee was submittedby the Indian representative (A/C.4/L.39). Thistext was in substance similar to the draft resolu-tion recommended by the Special Committee, andreplaced the latter resolution as the basis of dis-cussion in the Fourth Committee. The chief dif-ference was in the method of electing members ofthe Committee. The Indian text provided for elec-tion of members by the General Assembly insteadof by the Fourth Committee as in previous years.It also provided for the extension of the Commit-tee's functions to include examination of measurestaken as a result of Assembly resolutions concern-ing economic, social and educational conditions inthe Territories.

Arguments for and against a committee for oneyear, for three years, and for a permanent commit-tee were again advanced in the Fourth Committee.

The representative of France proposed the sub-stitution for the Indian draft resolution of a textsimilar to that introduced in the Special Commit-tee by the Belgian representative. The French pro-posal would renew the existing Committee for1950. The French representative later withdrewthis proposal, suggesting instead that the Indiandraft resolution be amended to provide for theestablishment of a new committee for one year(1950) rather than three, and for the deletionof references to 1951 and 1952 (A/C.4/L.52).The Committee rejected the French amendment bya vote of 8 in favour, 36 against, with 4 abstentions.

A proposal for the establishment of the Com-mittee "as a subsidiary organ" of the Assembly,thereby making it a permanent body, was intro-duced by the Czechoslovak representative as anamendment to the Indian draft resolution (A/-C.4/L.46). A vote was taken by roll-call on thisamendment. It was rejected by 13 votes in favourto 23 against, with 12 abstentions.

As was the case at the third session of the As-sembly in 1948, many Members which had ex-pressed their preference for the establishment of apermanent special committee nevertheless sup-ported the Indian proposal to constitute a commit-


tee for three years. It was indicated by some thata resolution for a permanent committee would notgain the required two-thirds vote in the Assem-bly. Others argued that even if such a resolutionwere adopted by the Assembly, the co-operationof the Administering Powers, without which thecommittee could not function effectively, wouldbe lost.

The decision to constitute a special committeefor a three-year period was adopted by the FourthCommittee by 42 votes to 5, with 1 abstention.

The second paragraph of the Indian draft reso-lution concerning the composition of the proposedSpecial Committee was also the subject of con-siderable discussion. It provided that the Com-mittee should be composed, as in the past, of allMembers transmitting information on Non-Self-Governing Territories, and an equal number ofother Members elected by the Assembly on aswide a geographical basis as possible. The Czecho-slovak representative, to enable as many Membersas possible to acquaint themselves with the prob-lems of Non-Self-Governing Territories, proposedthat the Committee be composed of all Memberstransmitting information and a third of the otherMembers of the United Nations (A/C.4/L.46).After other members of the Fourth Committee in-dicated that a Special Committee of so manymembers would be unwieldy and that it waspreferable to continue the balanced distribution ofAdministering and non-administering Powers, theCzechoslovak representative withdrew his proposedamendment.

The Netherlands representative introduced anamendment to the Indian text, to ensure that thebalance of Administering and non-administeringMembers on the Special Committee would bemaintained in the event of an increase or reduc-tion in the number of Members transmitting in-formation; this would require the election of somemembers each year (A/C.4/L.51). The Cubanrepresentative introduced an amendment to pro-vide for the election of non-administering Mem-bers by the Fourth Committee rather than by theAssembly (A/C.4/L.50). The representative ofIndia agreed to take these suggestions into account.Paragraph 2 of the Indian draft resolution was thenredrafted several times until agreement was finallyreached by the representatives of Cuba and theNetherlands on a text, proposed by the Indianrepresentative, which called for. the election of twomembers for one year and two for two years inthe first election. The representative of Polandconsidered that all the non-administering mem-bers of the Special Committee should be electedfor three years in order to acquire sufficient experi-

ence. He introduced an amendment to this effectwhich was rejected by the Fourth Committee by9 votes in favour to 21 against, with 15 absten-tions. The Committee then adopted, by 39 votesto 1, with 7 abstentions, paragraph 2, as finallyproposed by the Indian representative.

Two oral amendments were introduced to para-graph 3 of the Indian draft resolution relating tothe Committee's functions: a Mexican amendment,providing that the Special Committee's examina-tion of information on Non-Self-Governing Ter-ritories should be "in the spirit of paragraphs 3and 4 of Article 1 and of Article 55 of the Charter"(A/C.4/SR.122), and a drafting amendment pro-posed by the representative of Canada (A/C.4/-SR.120). Both were incorporated in paragraph 3,which was adopted by 43 votes to 4.

A United States amendment was accepted bythe Indian representative to add to paragraph 4(concerning the programme of meetings of theSpecial Committee) the words: "in order that itshould conclude its work not later than one weekbefore the opening of each session" (A/C.4/L.48).As thus amended, this paragraph was adopted by41 votes to 1, with 4 abstentions.

The last two paragraphs were adopted as orig-inally submitted by the Indian representative, byvotes of 43 to 2, with 3 abstentions, and 42 to 3,with 2 abstentions, respectively, a French amend-ment to delete from the final paragraph the re-quirement that the Assembly review the composi-tion of the Committee in 1952 having beenrejected.

A vote by roll-call was taken on the Indian draftresolution as a whole, as amended. It was adoptedby 41 votes to 4, with 2 abstentions.

During the Assembly's consideration of theFourth Committee's report, at its 262nd and 263rdplenary meetings on 1 and 2 December 1949, therepresentatives of Belgium, France and the UnitedKingdom restated their position, which they hadexplained in the Fourth Committee, with respectto the resolution to establish the Special Commit-tee. By extending the life of the Committee andassigning it functions clearly beyond the provisionsof the Charter, they declared, the Assembly wouldbe exceeding its constitutional powers. Therefore,they fully reserved the position of their Govern-ments with respect to this resolution.

On 2 December 1949, the Assembly voted onthe resolution proposed by the Fourth Committee.It was adopted, without change, by 44 votes to 5,with 4 abstentions. The text follows (332 ( IV) ) :

"The General Assembly,"Having considered the work of the Special Commit-

tee on Information transmitted under Article 73 e of


the Charter which was constituted by resolution 219(III)adopted by the General Assembly on 3 November 1948,and

"Taking into account the possibilities of further con-structive work by such a Committee,

"1. Decides to constitute a Special Committee for athree-year period;

"2. Considers that the Special Committee should becomposed of those Members of the United Nationstransmitting information in accordance with Article 73 eof the Charter and of an equal number of non-admin-istering Members elected by the Fourth Committee onbehalf of the General Assembly, on as wide a geo-graphical basis as possible. The non-administering Mem-bers of the Special Committee shall be elected for a termof three years. At the first election, however, two Mem-bers shall be elected for a term of two years, and twofor a term of one year only. A separate vote shall betaken for each election;

"3. Invites the Special Committee to examine, in thespirit of paragraphs 3 and 4 of Article 1 and of Article55 of the Charter, the summaries and analyses of in-formation transmitted under Article 73 e of the Charteron the economic, social and educational conditions inthe Non-Self-Governing Territories, including any papersprepared by the specialized agencies and any reports orinformation on measures taken in pursuance of theresolutions adopted by the General Assembly concern-ing economic, social and educational conditions in theNon-Self-Governing Territories;

"4. Considers that the Special Committee shouldmeet in 1950, 1951 and 1952 before the opening ofthe regular sessions of the General Assembly, at placesand dates to be determined by the Secretary-General,in order that it should conclude its work not later thanone week before the opening of each session;

"5. Invites the Special Committee to submit to theregular sessions of the General Assembly in 1950, 1951and 1952 reports containing such procedural recom-mendations as it may deem fit and such substantiverecommendations as it may deem desirable relating tofunctional fields generally but not with respect to indi-vidual territories;

"6. Decides that at its regular sessions in 1950 and1951 the General Assembly will proceed to any newelections for the Special Committee that may be neces-sary, and examine in 1952 the question whether theSpecial Committee should be renewed for a furtherperiod, together with the questions of the compositionand terms of reference of any such future Special Com-mittee."

11. Election of Members of theSpecial Committee

In accordance with the above resolution, theFourth Committee, at its 142nd meeting on 5December 1949, elected by secret ballot the eightnon-administering Members of the Special Com-mittee. The representatives of Belgium, France andthe United Kingdom declared that they would notparticipate in the elections.

The following States were elected:

To serve for a term of three years—Egypt, India,Brazil, USSR;

To serve for a term of two years—Mexico, Philip-pines;

To serve for a term of one year—Venezuela, Sweden.

The Assembly, at its 274th plenary meeting on9 December 1949, took note of these elections.

The Special Committee is therefore composed ofthe above eight elected Members for the terms ofoffice indicated, and of the following Memberstransmitting information: Australia, Belgium, Den-mark, France, Netherlands, New Zealand, UnitedKingdom, United States.

12. Work of the Special Committee

A joint proposal that the Special Committeeshould concentrate on one functional field eachyear, giving special attention to education in 1950,was introduced in the Fourth Committee by Mex-ico and the United States. This proposal was dis-cussed at the 123rd meeting of the Fourth Commit-tee on 11 November 1949, after it had been re-vised by the authors to make it clear that educationwas to be interpreted in a broad sense. The ac-ceptance by the United States representative of aMexican suggestion resulted in another revision,made during the discussions, to ensure that theCommittee's special attention to education in 1950should be "without prejudice to the considerationof the other two functional fields" (A/C.4/L.41/-Rev.l and 2).

The representatives of Belgium, France and theUnited Kingdom opposed the draft resolution inview of their reservations with respect to theSpecial Committee, which they considered uncon-stitutional. The French representatives made itclear that his opposition was not based on themerits of the resolution, for which under othercircumstances he might have voted. The repre-sentatives of Belgium and the United Kingdom,however, maintained that the resolution went be-yond the provisions of the Charter, in that no Com-mittee was competent to inquire into the activitiesof the Administering Powers with regard to theTerritories; and, furthermore, that such a Commit-tee would not be qualified to discuss the technicalproblems of education.

The representatives of Brazil and the USSR in-dicated that they would abstain from voting on theresolution, since it might tend to limit the Commit-tee's consideration in 1950 of economic and socialconditions. The Brazilian representative addedthat the Committee might not have time for asubstantial discussion of the whole question of ed-


ucation in the Territories. The Canadian repre-sentative stated that the draft resolution mightserve no useful purpose if the Administering Pow-ers did not collaborate in the work proposed, andhe would therefore abstain from voting.

The representatives of Cuba, Egypt, India, thePhilippines and Yemen on the other hand, spokein favour of the draft resolution and the FourthCommittee adopted it by a roll-call vote of 31 to 3,with 10 abstentions.

By a vote of 35 to 5, with 9 abstentions, theresolution was also adopted, without change, atthe 263rd plenary meeting of the Assembly on 2December 1949. It read as follows (333 ( IV)) :

"The General Assembly,"Noting that resolution 332 (IV) adopted by the Gen-

eral Assembly on 2 December 1949 provided for theestablishment of a Special Committee on Informationtransmitted under Article 73 e of the Charter for athree-year period without prejudice as to the future,

"Considering that the value of the work of the Com-mittee would be enhanced if, without prejudice to theannual consideration of all the functional fields enu-merated in Article 73 e of the Charter, special attentionwere given to one field each year,

"Noting that the Special Committee will have beforeit at its 1950 session a considerable volume of docu-mentation on the subject of education including variousreports from the United Nations Educational, Scientificand Cultural Organization,

"Considering that information on the development offacilities for the training of the peoples of the Non-Self-Governing Territories deserves particular attention at atime when programmes of economic and social develop-ment are being extended or initiated,

"1. Invites the Special Committee at its 1950 session,without prejudice to the consideration of the otherfunctional fields, to give special attention to the problemsof education in the Non-Self-Governing Territories,with particular attention to development of trainingin the economic and social fields;

"2. Invites members of the Special Committee tomake special preparations in this field for the 1950session, with a view to facilitating the constructive inter-change of ideas and experience on such educationalproblems;

"3. Invites the Secretary-General to consult with theUnited Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Or-ganization and other specialized agencies in order tosecure their collaboration in the study of these problems."

13. Publication of SupplementaryInformation on Non-Self-Governing

Territories

A joint draft resolution relating to the publica-tion of information on Non-Self-Governing Terri-tories was introduced in the Fourth Committee bythe representatives of Cuba, Ecuador and Guate-mala (A/C.4/L.40/Rev.l). It was considered by

the Committee on 16 and 17 November 1949, fromits 125th to 127th meetings.

The purpose of the proposed resolution, as statedby the Cuban representative, was, first, to drawattention to the fact that the summaries andanalyses transmitted in 1948 had not been pub-lished in Spanish and that this should not occur inthe future, and, second, to ask the Secretary-Gen-eral to publish periodically, in addition to the sum-maries and analyses and the annual supplements,data on special aspects of the progress achieved inthe Non-Self-Governing Territories.

As required by rule 142 of the Assembly's rulesof procedure, this draft resolution was accompaniedby a note by the Secretary-General on its financialimplications (A/C.4/L.47). It was estimated thatthe printing costs involved, calculated on the basisof the cost of publication, in the three workinglanguages, of three separate documents of about100 pages each, would be approximately $12,250.

With regard to the work involved, it waspointed out by the Secretary-General's representa-tive attending the Fourth Committee meetingsthat the various draft resolutions adopted by theCommittee would impose a heavy burden on theSecretariat. To carry out this programme, theSecretariat would be forced to adopt an order ofpriority for its work. Top priority, it was indi-cated, would be granted to the preparation of thesummaries and analyses of information, after whichthe Secretariat would have to discharge the dutiesentailed by its relations with the specializedagencies. If the joint draft resolution in questionwere adopted, it was hoped that the Secretariatwould be given the necessary latitude to decide asto the form and frequency of publication of thedocuments requested.

The representative of Cuba agreed to this orderof priority, stating that the sponsors of the resolu-tion wished to allow the Secretariat all latitude withregard to the form and contents of the proposedpublications.

The United Kingdom representative stressed thedifficulties of implementing the resolution. Re-ferring to the General Assembly resolution218(III) of 3 November 1948, which specificallyinvited the Secretary-General to include com-parable information in his summaries and analyses,he indicated that, although he would not votefor the joint resolution, he would not vote againstit if it included a provision for comparisons withprogress achieved in self-governing States.

The representatives of Belgium and France alsoopposed the resolution, pointing out that such pub-lications on the progress of the Territories mightrisk the impartiality of the Secretariat; it would be


preferable, they stated, to indicate the progressmade by references supplied by the AdministeringPowers themselves to available information. Theyalso agreed with the United Kingdom representa-tive that the progress achieved in the Territoriesshould be compared with that achieved by otherMembers of the United Nations in the same fields.

The representative of Canada proposed anamendment to add the following to the last para-graph of the resolution, relating to the publicationof data on special aspects of the progress achievedin the Territories: "comparing such progress, asappropriate, with that achieved in other countriesas assessed from the relevant and comparable offi-cial information which has been communicated tothe United Nations or to the specialized agencies"(A/C.4/SR.126). The representative of Cuba sug-gested instead of the Canadian amendment the ad-dition of the following: "making use, if it isdeemed necessary, of the sources of data indicatedin paragraph 3 of resolution 218(III) of theGeneral Assembly" (A/C.4/SR.126). This pro-posal, he indicated, was made in the hope of se-curing the support of the United Kingdom repre-sentative. Interpreting the discussion which en-sued as a failure of his conciliatory effort, the Cubanrepresentative withdrew his amendment. Therepresentative of the United States, who had sup-ported this amendment, pointed out that its with-drawal did not alter the situation, since the provi-sions of resolution 218(III), which were still ineffect, enabled the Secretary-General to follow pre-cisely the procedure suggested by the Cuban amend-ment.

A USSR amendment (A/C.4/SR.126) to deletethe second paragraph of the draft resolution, to theeffect that the information contained in the sum-maries and analyses had considerable value, wasdefeated by 7 votes in favour to 17 against, with20 abstentions.

The Canadian amendment was rejected by a roll-call vote of 13 in favour to 24 against, with 8 ab-stentions.

The Committee then adopted the joint draft

resolution of Cuba, Ecuador and Guatemala by aroll-call vote of 28 to 3, with 14 abstentions.

The question of the financial implications of thisresolution were referred to the Fifth (Adminis-trative and Budgetary) Committee, which, at its227th meeting on 22 November, in turn referredit to the Advisory Committee on Administrativeand Budgetary Questions. The recommendationof this Committee (A/1153) was unanimouslyadopted by the Fifth Committee. Accordingly, inits report, called to the attention of the Assemblyon 1 December 1949, the Fifth Committee indi-cated that the adoption of the resolution in ques-tion would involve the expenditure of $12,250,but that no additional appropriation for 1950would be required (A/1166).

On 2 December 1949, at its 263rd plenary meet-ing, the General Assembly adopted without changethe resolution on the publication of informationrelating to Non-Self-Governing Territories. Thisdecision was taken by 31 votes to 4, with 16 ab-stentions, following a general discussion of thereport of the Fourth Committee. As thus adopted,the resolution (335(IV)) read:

"The General Assembly,"Having noted the summaries and analyses prepared

by the Secretary-General of the information transmittedunder Article 73 e of the Charter,

"Considering that the information contained thereinon conditions existing in Non-Self-Governing Terri-tories has considerable value and that very abundantsupplemental information has been placed at the dis-posal of the Secretary-General by the Members con-cerned,

"Considering that resolution 218(III), adopted bythe General Assembly on 3 November 1948, invitesthe Secretary-General to prepare full summaries andanalyses at three-year intervals and annual supplementsin the intervening years,

"1. Notes that, in future, the complete summaries andanalyses, as well as the annual supplements, are requiredto be published in the three working languages;

"2. Invites the Secretary-General to complement thesummaries and analyses, as well as the annual supple-ments, by the periodical publication of data on specialaspects of the progress achieved in Non-Self-GoverningTerritories as contained in the information transmittedunder Article 73 e of the Charter and in the supple-mental information."

vii. questions concerning non-self-governing...

Documents