REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE ON UNITED NATIONS

REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE ON UNITED NATIONSSource: Proceedings of the Section of International and Comparative Law (American BarAssociation), (SEPTEMBER 18-19, 1951), pp. 129-138Published by: American Bar AssociationStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/25742895 .

Accessed: 12/06/2014 23:38

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

American Bar Association is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Proceedingsof the Section of International and Comparative Law (American Bar Association).

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 195.34.79.79 on Thu, 12 Jun 2014 23:38:10 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=aba

http://www.jstor.org/stable/25742895?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


GENERAL COMMITTEE REPORTS 129

in New York s but many teachers from remote points were unable to come. Your committee is happy to

report that initial contact has been made with a foundation interested in this type of project from which the

necessary funds may become available. The second project is to consider

some method of publishing Dr. Kurt Nadelmann 's bibliography, now nearly completed, on foreign law materials available in English. Schlesinger's casebook, previously mentioned, has an excellent bibliography of such ma

terials published since 1929, but the earlier data is needed as well by teachers and students. It is hoped that a source for the comparatively small sum needed can be uncovered by next year.

Other projects for consideration in

clude a new translation of Schlegel berger 's Bechtsvergleichendes Sand

8 Thayer, Teaching of International

and Comparative Law (1949) j. of Legal Ed. 449. The proceedings of the Institute have been summarized in

mimeographed form by the Committee on International and Foreign Law, Association of American Law Schools.

woerterbuch fuer das Zivil?und Han delsrecht from the revised edition

being prepared at the Institute in

Tuebingen, and a study of the com

parative law of attorney's fees.9 The most important service that

members of the American Bar Asso ciation generally can render to fur

ther education in international and

comparative law is to inquire whether courses are being offered in tHe law

schools to which each went and, if not, to ask why not.

Respectfully submitted, William Tucker Dean, Jr.,

Chairman

William W. Bishop, Jr. Albert A. Ehrenzweig Leda . Hartwell William A. Mellan E. S. Rashba Oliver Schroeder, Jr. Irwin Springer Philip W. Thayer Bruce W. Wayne

9 See Ehrenzweig, Shall Counsel Fees Be Allowed? (1951) 26 j. of St. B. of Calif. 107.

REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE ON

UNITED NATIONS

RECOMMENDATION

It is recommended that the Section adopt a resolution providing as follows:

"Be it Resolved, That the United States Delegation to the

United Nations General Assembly be urged to take all neces

sary action to have the draft Covenant on Human Eights resubmitted by the Assembly to the Commission on Human

Rights for further consideration of all of its provisions with

adequate time for the proper performance of this important work.

' ' *

* In substance, this approach was

rejected by the House of Delegates,

which resolved that the draft is not suitable in form or content for ap proval.

5



130 SECTION OF INTERNATIONAL AND COMPARATIVE LAW

REPORT

This committee has concerned itself

primarily with developments in con nection with the draft Covenant on

Human Rights and the Genocide Con vention. This report will be confined to developments during the past year with respect to those two important United Nations' documents.

1. The Proposed Covenant on

Human Rights

In September 1950, this committee submitted a very detailed report on

the history of the consideration by the United Nations of the Human Rights Covenant, together with a considera tion of each provision of the then cur rent draft of the Covenant.1 That

report also sets forth the very inter

esting history of the conception of the idea that provisions on human rights should be inserted in the Charter of the United Nations. Your committee has learned with a real sense of great loss of the untimely death of one of the authors of that report, Mr. David

A. Simmons of Houston, Texas. As

pointed out in that report, Mr. Sim

mons, who was then President of the American Bar Association and one of the official consultants to the United States delegation to the San Francisco

Conference, was one of the persons who originated the idea of including the provisions concerning human

rights in the Charter.2 He really fathered the idea of international co

operation through the United Nations to assure basic human rights to aid in securing and maintaining a peace ful world and his leadership in this field will be greatly missed.

The United Nations General Assem

bly, on December 4, 1950, adopted three resolutions respecting the then current draft of the proposed Cove nant on Human Rights, after the re

port of this committee was submitted to this Section. After commending

1 Proc. Section of Int. & Comp. L.

(1950) pp. 112-125. 2 Id. at 114-115.

the Commission on Human Rights and

calling upon the Economic and Social Council to request the Commission to continue to give priority to the draft Covenant in order that the Assembly may have the revised draft for the sixth session, the first resolution states that the list of rights in the first 18 articles of the Covenant does not con tain certain elementary rights, that the wording of some of these articles should be improved and that account should be taken of the principles and

purposes of the United Nations Char

ter, and calls upon the Economic and Social Council to request the Com mission to take into consideration in its revision of the Covenant (a) the views expressed during discussions at the fifth session of the Assembly and the eleventh session of the Council, in

cluding those relating to articles 13 and 14 and, with a view to the ad dition of other rights, those relating to rights set forth by the U.S.S.R. and Yugoslavia in specific documents; and (b) the view that it is desirable to define the rights and limitations with the greatest possible precision. The first resolution also calls upon the Economic and Social Council to

request the Human Rights Commis sion to study a federal-state article and to prepare, for consideration at the Assembly's sixth session, recom

mendations having as their purpose the securing of the maximum exten sion of the Covenant to the constitu ent units of federal states, and the

meeting of constitutional problems of

such states. The Commission is also asked to study ways and means to in sure the right of peoples and nations to self-determination and to prepare recommendations for the sixth ses

sion. Another section of the first reso

lution provides for inclusion in the

Covenant of economic, social and cul

tural rights and an explicit recog nition of equality of men and women

in related rights; calls upon the

Council to request the Commission to




include a clear expression of economic, social, and cultural rights in a man ner relating them to the civic and po litical freedoms proclaimed in the

Covenant, and to take steps to obtain

cooperation of other United Nations

organs and specialized agencies in consideration of such rights; and re

quests the Economic and Social Coun cil to consider at its twelfth session the methods by which the specialized agencies might cooperate with the Commission on the rights. The reso lution also calls upon the Council to ask the Commission to consider pro visions to be inserted in the Covenant or in separate protocols for the re

ceipt and examination of petitions from individuals and organizations on

alleged Covenant violations and to re

port to the Council at its thirteenth session concerning those matters. The

Secretary-General was requested to in vite member states to submit by Feb

ruary 15, 1951, their views on the re vised draft Covenant.

The second resolution requests the Human Rights Commission to include in the Covenant a prescribed article

providing that the Covenant shall be

applicable equally to a signatory metropolitan state and to all the terri

tories, be they non-self-governing, trust, or colonial, which are being ad

ministered or governed by such a state.

The final resolution invites all states and interested organizations to adopt December 10 as Human Rights Day and invites all states to report an

nually through the Secretary-General on the observance of this day.

During its seventh session, held in

Geneva, Switzerland, from April 10

through May 19, 1951, the Human

Rights Commission, acting pursuant to the resolution of the General As

sembly, drafted provisions on eco

nomic, social and cultural rights and included these in the current draft Covenant. The Commission also re

vised, in certain particulars, the im

plementation machinery provided in the Covenant in regard to civil and

political rights, but rejected the in clusion of a provision which would authorize the filing of petitions by private individuals or organizations. Since the meeting of the Commission was of limited duration, it did not have sufficient time to study or make

any recommendations concerning a federal-state article or to consider further the substantive provisions con tained in the first 18 articles.

The Commission on Human Rights forwarded the incompleted draft of the Covenant to the Economic and Social Council of the United Nations. That Council considered this draft at its meeting in Geneva which began July 30, 1951, and on August 29, 1951

adopted a resolution providing as fol lows :

' ' The Economic and Social Coun cil.

"A. Takes note of the report of the Commission on Human Rights at its seventh session.

"Expresses its appreciation to the Commission for its efforts to formulate basic economic, social and cultural rights and measures relat ing to their implementation.

"Notes that lack of time pre vented the Commission from under

taking certain of the tasks assigned it under Council resolution 349 (XIII) in pursuance of resolutions 421 and 422 (V) of the General

Assembly. " Requests the Commission on

Human Rights at its next session to proceed with these tasks, in par ticular the revision of the first 18 articles of the draft Covenant and the preparation of recommendations aimed at securing the maximum ex tension of the Covenant to the con stituent units of federal states and at meeting the constitutional prob lems of these states.

"B. Considering the progress made in pursuance of resolution 421

(V) of the General Assembly. "Considering that, though more

work will be required before a cove nant of human rights is ready for

adoption, a state has been reached where it would be desirable for gov ernments not represented on the Commission of Human Rights or on




the Economie and Social Council to be given an opportunity to express their views upon the work done by the Commission, and in particular its proposals relating to implemen tation, and to this end.

1 - Transmit to the General Assem

bly for its consideration the report of the Commission on Human

Rights at its seventh session to

gether with the records of the dis cussions thereon in the Council at its thirteenth session.

"C. Having noted resolution 421

(V) of the General Assembly call

ing upon the Economic and Social Council to request the Human

Rights Commission to include in the draft Covenant of Human

Rights a clear expression of eco

nomic, social and cultural rights in a manner which relates them to the civic and political freedoms pro claimed by the previous draft of the Covenant.

/ Noting that the revised draft covenant prepared at the seventh session of the Human Rights Com

mission in response to this request contains provisions relating, inter

alia, to such rights. -Considering that these pro

visions provide for two different methods of implementation, without indicating which method or methods are to apply.

*A. To political and civil rights. "B. To economic, social and cul

tural rights. Conscious of the difficulties

which may flow from embodying in one covenant two different kinds of

rights and obligations; Aware of the importance of

formulating, in the spirit of the

Charter, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and General As

sembly resolution 421 (V) eco

nomic, social and cultural rights in the manner most likely to assure their effective implementation;

Invites the General Assembly to reconsider its decision in reso lution 421 (V) E to include in one covenant articles on economic, so cial and cultural rights together with articles on civil and political rights.

' '

This resolution was adopted at a

plenary session of the Economic and

Social Council by a vote of 11 to 5 with 2 abstentions. The states voting in favor of the resolution were:

United States, United Kingdom, In

dia, Belgium, Uruguay, Sweden, Can

ada, Peru, China, Iran and France. The states voting against the resolu tion were: Czechoslovakia, Mexico, Pakistan, Poland, and the U.S.S.R. Those abstaining were Chile and the

Philippines. The resolution was spon sored by Belgium, India, United King dom, United States, and Uruguay. There was a roll call on each part of the resolution and part C which sug

gested that the General Assembly re

consider its decision to include in one

covenant the articles on economic, so

cial and cultural rights together with the civil and political rights was

adopted by a vote of 11 to 7. On this vote Chile and the Philippines joined those who had voted against parts A and of the resolution.

It seems reasonable to assume that when the draft Covenant on Human

Rights and this resolution of the Eco nomic and Social Council go before the Assembly in November 1951, the

incompleted draft will almost cer

tainly be referred back to the Com mission on Human Rights.

In view of the current status of the draft convention, your committee will comment only briefly on the economic, social and cultural provisions which are a part of that draft. The civil and

political rights which were thoroughly considered in this commitee's report of last year remain unchanged in the

current draft of the Covenant.

(A) Economic, Social and Cultural

Bights

One of the first achievements of the Commission on Human Rights, which was created in 1946 by the Economic

and Social Council of the United Na

tions, was to draft a proposed Uni versal Declaration of Human Rights which would impose a moral, but not a legal, obligation upon member na

tions to secure universal observance of

the fundamental rights and freedoms




of man.3 The Declaration was not limited to civil and political rights, but recognized economic, social and cultural rights. The proposed Uni versal Declaration of Human Rights was adopted by the General Assembly by resolution on December 10, 1948.

While the proposed Covenant on

Human Rights was in the process of

being drafted by the Commission, considerable sentiment was expressed to the effect that the Covenant should include the economic, social and cul tural rights enumerated and set forth in the Universal Declaration of Hu

man Rights, but a majority of the Commission was of the view, as was

your committee, that the Covenant should relate only to civil and politi cal freedoms. The views of the ma

jority of the Commission were not shared by the General Assembly last December when it directed the Com mission to include in the Covenant

provisions regarding economic, social

and cultural rights. Representatives of the United States, both in the Gen eral Assembly and on the Commission, have taken the position that the pro visions on economic, social and cul tural rights should be set forth in a

separate covenant. During the 1951 session of the Commission on Human

Rights, representatives of India urged that the General Assembly be re

quested to reconsider the decision that

economic, social and cultural rights should be included in the Covenant. This proposal was supported by the United States and others but was re

jected by a vote of 5 to 12 with one

abstention.4 The Covenant as now drafted con

sists of six parts. Parts I and II,

containing civil and political rights,

3 See Report of the Commission on Human Rights of the Second Session of the Commission, December 2-17, U.N. Doc. E/600, p. 19. See also

Hendrick, Progress Report on Human

Eights, 10 Dept. State Bull. 159, 160 (1948).

4 James Simsarian, Economic, Social and Cultural Provisions in the Human

Eights Covenant, 24 Dept. State Bull. 1003-1014.

are in the same form as they were when considered in detail by this com mittee's 1950 report to the Section. Part III contains economic, social and cultural objectives, Part IV sets forth the complaint machinery, Part V is the reporting requirements, and Part VI contains the federal-state article, the territories article, and articles

governing certain procedures and the

coming into force of the Covenant. The economic, social and cultural

rights stated in Part III, although termed "rights" are, when the whole text of the part is considered, in the

main only objectives toward which the states adhering to the Covenant under

take to strive. The obligation of a

state ratifying the Covenant will be to take steps for the promotion of

conditions for economic, social and cultural progress and development. It is anticipated that the complaint pro cedure contained in the implementa tion of civil, and political rights will not be made applicable to these eco

nomic, social and cultural objectives, but that the implementation of these

objectives will be through reports made by the states involved and recom

mendations and commentaries on these

reports made by the appropriate or

gans and agencies of the United Na tions organization.

The objectives?called rights?con tained in Part III relate to the right to work (if one so desires)5 and just and favorable conditions of work, social security, adequate housing and

adequate standards of living, and high standards of health. It is recognized that special protection should be ac

corded to maternity and motherhood

5 The representatives of the Soviet

Union, who had withdrawn from the

previous session of the Commission but who returned for the 1951 session, submitted various proposals relative to the right to work. The portent of their proposals recognized not only a

"right" to work but also a "duty" to work. The Soviet proposals were, of course, rejected and the article on the right to work has been so drafted to avoid any implication of compul sion.



134 section of International and comparative law

as well as to children and young per sons. Free primary education is recog nized as compulsory, but so is the lib

erty of parents to choose for their children schools other than those es

tablished by the state if they conform to minimum standards. Other articles relate to the opportunity to take part in the cultural life of the community, to enjoy the benefits of scientific prog ress and to join trade unions.

The United States proposed, and it

has been recommended by your com

mittee, that an article be included in

the Covenant recognizing the right to hold property. For the present, the Commission voted against the inclu sion of such an article.

One of the debates in the Commis sion had to do with whether or not the

achievements of the stated economic, social and cultural objectives would be in terms of state legislation only or by

means and methods private as well as

public. The U.S.S.R. repeatedly urged that it be provided in the Covenant that these objectives be achieved only through state legislation, but this

proposition was voted down. Article 19 provides that states will take steps "with a view to achieving progres sively the full realization of the rights recognized in this part of the present Covenant." The phrase "with a

view" was stressed as pointing to the achievement of conditions in a state

whereby these objectives could be se

cured by private action as well as

governmental action. The idea that

these objectives shall be achieved

through private as well as public action should be made more manifest.

Part V of the draft Covenant pro vides that states ratifying the Cove nant will be required to submit re

ports concerning steps taken to real ize the economic, social and cultural

rights recognized in the Covenant. The Commission seemingly assumed that the implementation provides in Part IV of the Covenant, which was drafted

originally during the 1950 session in

regard to civil and political rights, were inappropriate with respect to

economic, social and cultural rights.

( ) Implementation of Civil and Po litical Rights

Acting in accordance with a reso

lution of the General Assembly, the Commission on Human Rights re

viewed and reconsidered the provisions in Part IV of the Covenant providing for implementation of the civil and

political rights. Proposed provisions that the Covenant grant to individuals and organizations the right to file

complaints were rejected. Certain

changes were made, however, in the

implementation provisions. It was

agreed to increase the membership of the Human Rights Committee from 7 to 9 members and that the committee should be elected by the International Court of Justice, rather than by states .

parties to the Covenant. It is pro

vided, however, that the International Court shall elect members only from a list of persons nominated by states

parties to the Covenant. An ad ditional article was added which would authorize the Human Rights Com mittee to recommend to the Economic and Social Council that the Council

request the International Court of

Justice to give an advisory opinion on

any legal question connected with a

matter of which the committee should be seized.

The Soviet Union again proposed that all implementation provisions be eliminated from the Covenant.

(C) Federal-State Article

The Commission failed to take

action on a so-called federal-state ar

ticle, but this does not mean that the Commission has rejected such an

article. Your committee has recom

mended, and the United States has

taken the position, that the Covenant must specifically provide that obliga tions undertaken by a federal state be limited to matters appropriate under a federal-state system, for federal

action only, in order that the Cove nant would not bind federal govern ments in spheres constitutionally lim

ited to state action. During the 1950

session of the Commission, the United




States submitted a proposed federal state article which would require fed eral governments, in respect to mat ters not appropriate for federal action, to bring such matters to the attention of the states with a recommendation for favorable action.

The Turlington Proposal Your committee is impressed with

the proposal so ably presented by Mr.

Edgar Turlington, former chairman of the Section, that the human rights program should be on the basis of standards of performance along the lines-of the International Labor Or

ganization's program.6 The I.L.O.

proceeds in general by suggesting standards for legislation for the do

mestic consideration of its members and of reporting the progress made

by member states in securing volun

tary adoption of the recommended standards. So-called

* * international

legislation" by treaty or convention is not always utilized. Mr. Turling ton's proposal is especially inviting now that the draft Covenant has gone beyond the plans of those who pro posed the idea. As outlined in this committee's 1950 report, it is clear that those who proposed the idea did not envision anything beyond the so called '-Bill of Rights" contained in our Constitution.?

Political and civil rights are essen

tially restraints upon the state in

favor of the individual and are thus a reflection of the history of the de

velopment of human freedom in the United States. Economic and social

rights?as distinguished from objec tives?are, for the most part, state

ments of the obligation of the state to furnish opportunities or benefits to the individual. As such, they are a

reflection of a wholly different his

torical development. The extent to

which one believes that the state should interfere to supply these rights

6 See Editorial by Edgar Turlington The Human Rights Commission at the Crossroads (July 1951) 45 Am. J. Int. L. 534.

7 S^e supra, note 2.

marks perhaps the essential differences between our free enterprise society and the fundamental ideals supported by some other nations. Many of the

things which others call economic

rights are not such under our free

enterprise system, but are objectives achieved largely by non-governmental action. The Turlington proposal may offer an opportunity for mutual co

operation to achieve an objective without forcing an immediate conflict between these fundamentals.

Since the General Assembly is not

expected to approve the Cavenant this

year, the Turlington proposal could have thorough consideration. The cur rent draft and the resolution of the Economic and Social Council will doubtless be referred by the Assembly to the Social Committee (Committee III) for study. If the Social Com mittee will recommend and the Assem

bly will effect a reorganization of the Commission on Human Rights along the lines of the International Labor

Organization, perhaps many of the difficult problems in this field can be solved. If the Commission on Human

Rights were reconstituted with a gov erning body and a secretariat, with sections or divisions devoted respec tively to social and economic objec tives (perhaps under an expanded and rechristened International Labor Of

fice), cultural objectives (under a similar office), and civil and political rights objectives (likewise under a

separate office), significant practical measures might begin to be taken in the immediate future. The idea is cer

tainly worth most careful considera tion as it allows for progressive de

velopment in this field and should avoid many apparent conflicts. Coop eration and experience under the Tur

lington proposal might well eliminate these conflicts entirely. As stated by

Mr. Turlington: "The road to be taken by the

Commission on Human Rights is

plain. It is, essentially, the way of the I.L.O. The problem of the pres ent and of the long future, in pro

moting the observance of fundamen




tal rights and freedoms, is to obtain

agreement and common action on

small, practical measures in the di rection indicated by the Universal Declaration. This is no time for paper guarantees in broad and gen eral terms. A Commission on Hu

man Rights duly reoriented could

appreciably shorten the time the world has to wait for the assurance of a good life to 'all the men in all the lands.' "

II. Genocide Convention

The proposed Genocide Convention was transmitted by the President of the United States to the Senate on June 16, 1949. During 1950, a sub committee of the Senate Foreign Re lations Committee under the chairman

ship of Senator McMahon conducted

hearings on the convention. In a re

port to the full committee on May 23, 1950, the subcommittee reported the convention favorably, but with certain " reservations ' 9 or " understandings

' 9

and a 'i declaration ' '

designed to meet the objections expressed in the main

by this committee in its 1949 report to the Section 8 and by the Committee on Peace and Law Through United

Nations.9 The Senate Foreign Rela tions Committee i s now engaged in

rewriting the " reservations '9 and

declaration" contained in its sub committee's report,10 evidently in the

hope of meeting objections that the subcommittee's suggested language is not adequate. It seems that no quick action may be expected on this con vention as the Senate Committee seems to be concerned with the basic consti tutional problems now receiving such able joint consideration by this Sec tion's Committee on Constitutional

Aspects of International Agreements, Mr. Harold . S fassen, chairman, and the Committee on Peace and Law

Through the United Nations, Mr. Al

fred J. Schweppe, chairman.

8 See Proc. Section of Int. & Comp. L. (1949) 190-201.

9 74 A.B.A. Rep. 316-339. 10 See Appendix A attached to this

report.

Since the Genocide Convention was

adopted by the United Nations 31 states have deposited their articles of ratification or accession with the Sec

retary-General of the United Nations. States ratifying the convention are:

Australia, Czechoslovakia,11 Denmark, Ecuador, El Salvador, Ethiopia, France, Guatemala, Haiti, Iceland, Israel, Liberia, Norway, Panama, Philippines,12 Yugoslavia, China and

Belgium. States becoming parties by accession are: Bulgaria,13 Cambodia, Ceylon, Costa Rica, Jordan, Korea, Laos, Monaco, Poland,14 Rumania, Saudi-Arabia, Turkey, and Viet-Nam.

Conclusions and Recommendation

In view of the present uncompleted status of the draft Covenant on Hu

man Rights, your committee does not believe it wise to present specific recommendations on the provisions of that Covenant to the Section at this time. It is believed that many of the

present problems in connection with the draft Covenant will be solved if the Human Rights Commission is

given an opportunity and adequate time to complete its work along the lines indicated by the Economic and Social Council in the resolution which

11 With reservation that there be no international implementation, thus in effect nullifying the whole purpose of the convention.

12 With reservations along the line of those suggested by the Senate For

eign Relations Committee infra, App. A. See in this connection the very in

teresting Advisory Opinion of the In ternational Court of Justice, handed down on May 28, 1951, on the effect of reservations to the Genocide Con vention. See text 45 Am. J. Int. L. 579-590. Since the principles an nounced in that decision are deemed to be within the jurisdiction of the Section's Committee on Constitutional Aspects of International Agreements, a detailed analysis of that opinion is not undertaken here.

3 Same as note 11, supra. * Same as note 11, supra.




that Council has transmitted to the

Assembly of the United Nations.

Because the United States is so

powerful economically and militarily, and because we have achieved more in the field of human rights than has ever been achieved anywhere, other countries expect us?and we ought? to furnish them leadership in their

quest for greater human rights. In our present struggle to frustrate Communist Russia's plans for world

domination, our own self-interest re

quires that we do this. For Russia's threat is not a military threat alone.

Through propaganda, she is attempt ing to win the minds of men by falsely depicting herself as the champion and the United States as the enemy of human rights.

Because notwithstanding the Iron Curtain the absence of civil and po litical liberties in the communist coun tries is so obvious, Russia has concen trated upon the dissemination of lies to the effect that scores of millions of our own people lack economic, social and cultural advantages and that we are not interested in and are actually opposed to the attainment of such ad

vantages by the peoples of other coun tries. Intensified United States effort in this field offers the best opportunity to demonstrate to the world how false and absurd this Russian propaganda really is.

While the inclusion in the draft Covenant of so-called "rights" of an

economic, social and cultural nature, which are not "rights" of a kind American lawyers think it appropriate to include in the Covenant, has com

plicated matters considerably, it is be lieved that the action suggested by the resolution of the Economic and Social Council will go a long way to ward solving the problems created by this latest development. Full explora tion of the Turlington proposal out lined herein may also offer the neces

sary compromise between our free en

terprise system where these so-called ' '

rights ' ' are largely objectives

achieved by non-governmental initia tive and systems of other nations who

attempt to achieve these broad objec tives chiefly through governmental action.

Since the then President of the American Bar Association had a large part in conceiving the idea that the United Nations Charter should in clude provisions on human rights, your committee believe that this leadership should be continued in an effort to lend every assistance to working out the most difficult and extremely im

portant problems involved in formu

lating proper steps to achieve basic human rights throughout the world. Continued effort should be made to make the draft Covenant a working instrument for a peaceful world or the

Turlington proposal should be adopted. The United States should go forward

vigorously in its position of leader

ship in this field so as to demonstrate to all people that we offer the human

rights which guarantee the freedom of

man, whereas Russia offers false words to hide the slavery which exists be hind the Iron Curtain. This effort offers us one of the best possible opportunities to frustrate Communist Russia's efforts to win the minds of the people of the free world and at the same time reach the minds of those behind the Iron Curtain who desire the freedoms which we now enjoy and

which they can enjoy by rejection of their communist dictators.

Respectfully submitted,

Charles S. Rhyne, Chairman

Joseph D. Calhoun Cyril Coleman Thomas T. Dodd Albert E. Jenner, Jr. Samuel E. Lieberman John E. Lockwood

*Douglas B. Maggs

* Mr. David A. Simmons served 'as a member of the committee until his death in April 1951.




APPENDIX A Reservations and Declarations on

Genocide Convention recommended by the Subcommittee of the Senate For

eign Relations Committee, reported in

Sen. Doc. 247, 81st Cong, as follows:

"(1) That article IX shall be understood in the traditional sense of responsibility to another state for injuries sustained by nationals of the complaining state in violation of the principles of international law. and shall not be understood as

meaning that a state can be held liable in damages for injuries in flicted by it on its own nationals.

(2) That the United States Gov ernment understands and construes the crime of genocide, which it undertakes to punish in accordance with this convention, to mean the commission of any of the acts enumerated in article II of the con

vention, with the intent to destroy an entire national, ethnical, racial, or religious group within the terri

tory of the United States, in such manner as to affect a substantial

portion of the group concerned;

(3) That the United States Gov ernment understands and construes the words i1 mental harm" appear ing in article II of this convention to mean permanent physical injury to mental faculties. (4) That the

United States Government under stands and construes the words

-complicity in genocide" appear ing in article II of this convention to mean participation before and after the fact and aiding and abet

ting in the commission of the crime of genocide. DECLARATION. In

giving its advice and consent to the ratification of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, the Senate of the United States of America does so considering this to be an exercise of the authority of the Federal Gov ernment to define and punish of fenses against the law of nations, expressly conferred by article I, section 8, clause 10, of the United States Constitution, and conse

quently, the traditional jurisdiction of the several States of the Union with regard to crime is in no way abridged.

9 '



Date post:	15-Jan-2017
Category:	Documents
Upload:	nguyendieu
View:	213 times
Download:	0 times

REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE ON UNITED NATIONS

Documents