United Nations Office of Legal...

ST/LEG/SER.C/13

UNITED NATIONS

JURIDICAL YEARBOOK

1975

UNITED NATIONS

UNITED NATIONS

JURIDICAL YEARBOOK

1975

UNITED NATIONS-NEW YORK

1977

ST/LEG/SER.C/13

UNITED NATIONS PUBLICATION

Sales No. E.77.V.3

Price: $U.S. 13.00(or equivalent in other currencies)

CONTENTSPage

FOREWORD xvii

ABBREVIATIONS xviii

Part One. Legal status of the United Nations and relatedintergovernmental organizations

CHAPTER I. LEGISLATIVE TEXTS CONCERNING THE LEGAL STATUS OF THE UNITEDNATIONS AND RELATED INTERGOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS

1. Canada

Privileges and Immunities (International Organizations) Act. F.A.O.(N.A.F.C.—8th Session) Privileges and Immunities Order, 1975 3

2. Mauritius

Order made by the Minister under decision 19 of the InternationalOrganizations and Conferences (Privileges and Immunities) Act, 1970 3

3. Papua New Guinea

United Nations and Specialized Agencies (Privileges and Immunities)Act, 1975 6

CHAPTER II. TREATY PROVISIONS CONCERNING THE LEGAL STATUS OF THEUNITED NATIONS AND RELATED INTERGOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS

A. TREATY PROVISIONS CONCERNING THE LEGAL STATUS OF THE UNITED NATIONS1. Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the United Nations.

Approved by the General Assembly of the United Nations on 13February 1946 11

2. Agreements relating to meetings and installations 11

3. Agreements relating to the United Nations Children's Fund: RevisedModel Agreement concerning the activities of UNICEF 24

4. Agreements relating to the United Nations Development Programme:standard basic agreements concerning assistance by the United NationsDevelopment Programme 24

5. Standard basic agreements between the United Nations (United NationsDevelopment Programme) and the International Civil Aviation Organ-ization concerning UNDP technical co-operation activities with Gov-ernments. Signed at Montreal on 21 November 1975 and at New Yorkon 5 December 1975 26

6. Exchange of letters constituting an agreement between the United Na-tions and Poland on principles of financing the participation of thePolish contingent in the United Nations Emergency Force and theUnited Nations Disengagement Observer Force in the Middle East.New York, 23 October 1975 27

iii

CONTENTS (continued)Page

B. TREATY PROVISIONS CONCERNING THE LEGAL STATUS OF INTERGOVERN-

MENTAL ORGANIZATIONS RELATED TO THE UNITED NATIONS

1. Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the Specialized Agencies.Approved by the General Assembly of the United Nations on 21 No-vember 1947 29

2. International Labour Organisation 29

3. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations 304. United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization 31

5. World Health Organization 316. International Atomic Energy Agency 31

Part Two. Legal activities of the United Nations and relatedintergovernmental organizations

CHAPTER III. GENERAL REVIEW OF THE LEGAL ACTIVITIES OF THE UNITEDNATIONS AND RELATED INTERGOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS

A. GENERAL REVIEW OF THE LEGAL ACTIVITIES OF THE UNITED NATIONS . . . . 37

B. GENERAL REVIEW OF THE ACTIVITIES OF INTERGOVERNMENTAL ORGAN-IZATIONS RELATED TO THE UNITED NATIONS 63

1. International Labour Organisation 63

2. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations 65

3. United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization . . . . 70

4. International Civil Aviation Organization 75

5. World Health Organization 776. World Bank 797. International Monetary Fund 808. World Meteorological Organization 839. International Atomic Energy Agency 84

CHAPTER IV. TREATIES CONCERNING INTERNATIONAL LAW CONCLUDED UNDER THEAUSPICES OF THE UNITED NATIONS AND RELATED INTERGOVERNMENTAL ORGAN-

IZATIONS

TREATIES CONCERNING INTERNATIONAL LAW CONCLUDED UNDER THE AUSPICESOF THE UNITED NATIONS

United Nations Conference on the Representation of States in their Rela-tions with International Organizations 87

(a) Vienna Convention on the Representation of States in their Rela-tions with International Organizations of a Universal Character.Done at Vienna on 14 March 1975 87

(b) Resolutions adopted by the Conference 114

iv


CHAPTER V. DECISIONS OF ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNALS OF THE UNITED NATIONSAND RELATED INTERGOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS

A. DECISIONS OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL OF THE UNITED NATIONS

1. Judgement No. 195 (18 April 1975): Sood v. Secretary-General ofthe United NationsApplication from a former staff member who was terminated before

his fixed-term appointment expired but subsequently obtained thecancellation of that measure—Legal consequences of the cancel-lation of a decision because the requirements of due process werenot fulfilled—Right of the person concerned to have his qualifi-cations for having his fixed-term appointment converted into apermanent appointment examined as if the cancelled decision hadnever been taken 117

2. Judgement No. 196 (18 April 1975): Back v. Secretary-General ofthe United Nations and United Nations Joint Staff Pension BoardApplication for compensation for financial losses linked to the devalu-

ation of the dollar—The inequality among retired staff membersof the United Nations which may result from a currency devalu-ation not attributable to the Organization does not impose on thelatter any specific duties towards any retired staff member—Ques-tion of the date on which payments relating to retirement mustbe made—Granting of compensation for damage caused by unduedelay in the payments of sums due in that regard 119

3. Judgement No. 197 (22 April 1975) : Osman v. Secretary-General ofthe United NationsApplication for revision of a judgement—Correction of this judgement

under article 12 in fine of the Statute of the Tribunal—Rejectionof the application notwithstanding the implications of the correc-tion in question on the equity of the case—Obligation of theTribunal, as a judicial organ, to apply existing law 120

4. Judgement No. 198 (23 April 1975) : Lane v. Secretary-General of theUnited NationsApplication for rescission of a decision to terminate, in accordance with

staff regulation 9.1(c), a probationary appointment after a periodof nearly two years beyond the expiry of the said appointment—Conditions to which the conversion of a probationary appoint-ment into a permanent appointment is subject—Entitlement of astaff member anomalously kept in service beyond the maximumprobationary period, owing to an administrative error, to dueprocess for the assessment of the suitability of a staff member onprobationary appointment for a permanent appointment 122

5. Judgement No. 199 (24 April 1975): Fracton v. Secretary-General ofthe United NationsApplication for rescission of a decision not to renew a fixed-term ap-

pointment—Limits of the Tribunal's authority to review such adecision—Principle of good faith in relations between the parties 123


6. Judgement No. 200 (24 April 1975) : Bearing v. Secretary-General ofthe United NationsApplication for rescission of a decision of the Secretary-General re-

fusing, on the basis of a recommendation of the Advisory Boardon Compensation Claims, to re-open a case concerning compen-sation—Broad discretionary powers of the Secretary-General withregard to the matter—Irregularity of a decision of the Secretary-General taken on the basis of a recommendation of the AdvisoryBoard made as the result of failure to observe the requirementsof due process—Failure to re-employ a recipient of compensationfor a service-incurred illness cannot be treated as a terminationon the ground of incapacity for further service unless the applicantcan claim that he had an appointment entitling him to permanentor continuous service—Rescission of the contested decision andfixing of compensation to be paid to the applicant if the Secretary-General does not consider that further action should be taken .. 125

7. Judgement No. 201 (25 April 1975): Branckaert v. United NationsJoint Staff Pension BoardApplication for rescission of a decision rejecting, on the ground of

non-observance of the prescribed time-limit, a request for val-idation of a period of service for pension purposes 127

8. Judgement No. 202 (3 October 1975): Queguiner v. Secretary-Gen-eral of the Inter-Governmental Maritime Consultative Organization

Application for an award of compensation, on the basis of the principleof acquired rights, for reduction in the education grant receivedby the applicant in consequence of an amendment to the StaffRules—Scope ratione materiae and ratione temporis of the prin-ciple of acquired rights 128

9. Judgement No. 203 (7 October 1975): Sehgal v. Secretary-Generalof the United Nations

Application requesting that a decision not to renew a fixed-term ap-pointment be declared void—Criteria for determining whether thequestion of the renewal of such an appointment was duly consid-ered and whether actions taken following a rebuttal of a periodicreport constitute an appropriate investigation 129

10. Judgement No. 204 (8 October 1975): Mila v. Secretary-General ofthe United Nations

Application directed against a decision to terminate following a cor-rection of procedure ordered by the Tribunal—Conclusions ofthe Tribunal regarding the procedure followed for the recon-sideration of the case and regarding the regularity of the contesteddecision—Reparation of the damage sustained by the applicantbecause of the administrative errors committed during the periodpreceding his termination 131

vi


11. Judgement No. 205 (9 October 1975): El-Naggar v. Secretary-Gen-eral of the United NationsApplication contesting a decision not to renew a fixed-term appoint-

ment—Obligations of the respondent arising from his "acceptance"of a recommendation by the Joint Appeals Board that he shouldseek to keep the applicant on the staff and should offer him a newand appropriate appointment 133

12. Judgement No. 206 (10 October 1975): Queguiner v. Secretary-General of the Inter-Governmental Maritime Consultative Organ-izationRequest for reimbursement of medical expenses submitted by a staff

member claiming that, owing to a fault on the part of therespondent, he had been denied the benefit of certain arrange-ments with respect to health insurance applicable in the EuropeanEconomic Community—Allegation that the impossibility of obtain-ing reimbursement of the expenses in question demonstrated theinadequacy of the IMCO health insurance plan, an inadequacyfor which the respondent should be held responsible 135

13. Judgement No. 207 (10 October 1975) : Squadrilli v. Secretary-Generalof the United NationsApplication filed by a United States staff member who was not exempt

from taxes on his United Nations salaries and emoluments owingto the reservation made by the United States to section 18 (b)of the Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the UnitedNations—System of reimbursement established to prevent staffmembers in the applicant's situation from being at a disadvantagevis-à-vis their colleagues of other nationalities—Methods of calcu-lating the amount which is reimbursable—Rejection, as purelyconjectural and incompatible with the obligations flowing fromthe Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the UnitedNations, of the respondent's allegations concerning the provisionswhich the United States would have taken had it not entered theaforementioned reservation 136

B. DECISIONS OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL OF THE INTERNATIONAL

LABOUR ORGANISATION

1. Judgement No. 248 (5 May 1975): Nowakovski v. World Meteor-ological OrganizationComplaint against a decision to terminate a permanent appointment

for unsatisfactory services 138

2. Judgement No. 249 (5 May 1975): Nowakovski v. World Meteor-ological OrganizationComplaint against a decision to dismiss a request for reconsideration

of a claim for compensation for illness attributable to the per-formance of official duties—Discretionary power of the Secretary-General in his exercise of the right conferred upon him byarticle 9 of the Statute of the Administrative Tribunal 139

vii

CONTENTS (continued)Pag€

3. Judgement No. 250 (5 May 1975) : Reding v. Universal Postal Union

Complaint against a decision denying the applicability of the benefitsprovided for in appendix D of the Staff Rules to the holder of acontract containing a provision on compensation in the event ofillness 140

4. Judgement No. 251 (5 May 1975) : De Sanctis v. Food and AgricultureOrganization of the United Nations

Complaint against a decision to reject the application for a permanentpost of a person who had worked for the Organization for severalyears on fixed-term appointments—Limits of the Tribunal's powerto interfere with such a decision and with a decision not to renewa fixed-term appointment 140

5. Judgement No. 252 (5 May 1975): Routier v. World Health Organ-ization

Complaint seeking regrading of a post at a higher level on the basisof the duties associated with the said post—Limits of the Tri-bunal's power to interfere with decisions in the matter made bythe Director-General on the basis of the Staff Manual 141

6. Judgement No. 253 (5 May 1975): Jimenez v. Pan American HealthOrganization (PAHO) (World Health Organization) 142

7. Judgement No. 254 (5 May 1975): Glynn v. World Health Organ-ization

Complaint seeking to have periodic reports declared null and void—Purpose of periodic reports under the Staff Rules—Circum-stances in which the Tribunal may endorse an allegation of biasagainst a supervisor 142

8. Judgement No. 255 (5 May 1975): Glynn v. World Health Organ-ization

Receivability of a complaint made directly to the Tribunal underarticle VII, paragraph 3, of the Statute of the Tribunal 143

9. Judgement No. 256 (5 May 1975): Conway v. International LabourOrganisation

Issue by the Organisation of an attestation concerning a staff mem-ber—Power of the Tribunal to decide on the legality of such anact—Obligation of the Organisation, except in special cases, toadvise the staff member concerned before providing informationconcerning him—Categories of documents to be placed by theOrganisation in the personal file of staff members—Latitudeallowed to the Organisation with regard to certain confidentialdocuments 144

viii


10. Judgement No. 257 (5 May 1975) : Grafstrôm v. Food and AgricultureOrganization of the United Nations

Complaint seeking an increase in a retirement pension to the level itwould have reached if the recipient had not been promoted duringher period of employment from the General Service to the Profes-sional category—Interpretation of staff rule 302.2103 as pro-tecting staff members from possible adverse effects on theirpension rights of a promotion 145

11. Judgement No. 258 (27 September 1975): Cantal-Dupart v. UnitedNations Educational, Scientific and Cultural OrganizationSummary dismissal of a complaint submitted after the expiry of the

time-limit 147

12. Judgement No. 259 (27 September 1975): Al Joundi v. InternationalTelecommunication Union

Irreceivability of a complaint impugning a decision which had becomefinal because it had not been impugned within the prescribedperiod 147

13. Judgement No. 260 (27 October 1975): Mofjeld v. Food and Agri-culture Organization of the United Nations

Complaint seeking to quash a decision terminating the employment ofthe holder of a fixed-term appointment for "unsuitability for apost" 148

14. Judgement No. 261 (27 October 1975): Remont v. Food and Agricul-ture Organization of the United Nations

Complaint seeking to attribute liability to the Organization for loss ordeterioration of personal property and to obtain compensation fordelay in the payment of sums owed by the Organization 148

15. Judgement No. 262 (27 October 1975): Labadie v. International Pat-ent InstituteComplaint seeking to have a promotion granted on the basis of a

specific administrative rule granted on the basis of another rulemore favourable to the complainant—Distinction, with respect tothe Tribunal's power of review, between decisions establishingsuch rules and subsequent individual decisions to apply them—Interpretation of the texts in question 149

16. Judgement No. 263 (27 October 1975): Andary v. InternationalPatent Institute

Complaint against a decision depriving staff members who haveresigned of the right to promotion—Limits of the Tribunal'spower of review with respect to such decisions 150

ix

CONTENTS (continued)

Page

17. Judgement No. 264 (27 October 1975): Rabozée v. European Organ-ization for the Safety of Air NavigationComplaint seeking reimbursement of medical expenses incurred in

respect of the complainant's spouse and a dependant—Case ofa household in which one spouse benefits as a staff member ofthe Organization from a sickness insurance scheme which ismore favourable than that covering the other spouse—Identicalrights of male and female staff members with respect to suchbenefits 151

CHAPTER VI. SELECTED LEGAL OPINIONS OF THE SECRETARIATS OF THE UNITEDNATIONS AND RELATED INTERGOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS

A. LEGAL OPINIONS OF THE SECRETARIAT OF THE UNITED NATIONS

1. Forms of association of States with the United Nations apart fromfull membership—Question whether States not members of the UnitedNations may benefit under the technical co-operation programmes ofthe United Nations family on the same basis as Member States .... 153

2. Question of the responsibility of the United Nations for activitiesconducted by one of its organs in the territory of a State 153

3. Provisions of the Headquarters Agreement between the United Nationsand the United States of America concerning action by the Host Statein case of abuse of the privileges of residence granted by the Agree-ment—Question whether the Host State is required in such a case toconsult the Organization before taking action 155

4. Privileges and immunities to which representatives of the Councilfor Mutual Economic Assistance would be entitled in the United Statesas Host State to the Headquarters of the United Nations in the lightof General Assembly resolution 3209 (XXIX) 157

5. Judicial jurisdiction and law applicable in the Headquarters Districtunder the Headquarters Agreement between the United Nations andthe United States of America 157

6. Comments on the juridical status of the United Nations DemographicCentre in Bucharest, in the light of the Agreement between the UnitedNations and Romania regarding the establishment of the Centre .... 159

7. Insurance of UNEF/UNDOF vehicles against third party liability—Question whether United Nations immunity from legal processshould be invoked or waived, where judicial proceedings are institutedagainst the United Nations in connexion with motor vehicle accidents 160

8. Advice on the procedure to be followed to collect compensation fordamage caused to UNEF property by members of military contingents 161

9. "Trade Names", "Trade Marks" and "Franchises"*'t /i /10. Guidelines for implementation of General Assembly resolutions granting

observer status on a regular basis to certain regional intergovernmentalorganizations, the Palestine Liberation Organization and the nationalliberation movements in Africa le4


11. Ruling by the President of the twenty-ninth session of the GeneralAssembly regarding the position of the delegation of South Africa—Question whether such a ruling should be considered automaticallyapplicable at the seventh special session of the Assembly, scheduled toopen before the official closure of the twenty-ninth regular session .. 167

12. Question whether the Secretary-General and the Administrative Com-mittee on Co-ordination could legally take steps to give effect toproposals in regard to the post-adjustment system designed to remedycertain deficiencies in the present system or whether such proposalsinvolving substantial increases in expenditure should be left for theGeneral Assembly 168^

13. Question whether, pending action by the Economic and Social Council,the Economic Commission for Western Asia may invite the .PalestineIîheration Organization to participate in its session as an observer'taking into "account General Assembly resolution 3237 (XXIX) . . . . 170

14. Question whether admission to membership in the United Nations ofa State within the geographical scope of the Economic and Social Com-mission for Asia and the Pacific automatically entitles such a State tomembership in the Commission 171

15. Question of associate membership in the Economic and Social Com-mission for Asia and the Pacific of the two dependent territories—theGilbert Islands and Tuvalu—resulting from the separation of the ElliceIslands from the former Gilbert and Ellice Islands Colony 172

16. Fifth United Nations Congress on the Prevention of Crime and theTreatment of Offenders—Question of issuing invitations to States notMembers of the United Nations and to individual participants fromsuch States 174

17. Question whether the United Nations Special Fund may give assistanceto national liberation movements under the provisions of the GeneralAssembly resolutions establishing the Fund and defining its operations 176

18. Establishment by the World Food Conference of an International Fundfor Agricultural Development—Convening by the Secretary-General,at the request of the Conference, of a "Meeting of interested coun-tries" to work out the details of the Fund—Question whether theUnited Nations is responsible for the expenses of the Meeting and itsAd Hoc Working Group 177

19. Use of Government-financed personnel within the United Nations—Associate experts and junior professionals 178

20. Question whether locally recruited personnel employed in connexionwith a specific UNDP project are United Nations staff members .... 179

21. Policy of the Organization with respect to the acceptance of theservices of Government officials or experts on a non-reimbursementloan basis—Status of officials or experts engaged on such basis 181

XI


22. Issuance of laissez-passers to officials of the World Intellectual PropertyOrganization—Special arrangements to take effect after the Conventionon the Privileges and Immunities of the Specialized Agencies enters intoforce in respect of WIPO—Provisional issuance of laissez-passers forthe interim period 181

23. Privileges and immunities of members of the staff of the United Na-tions—Meaning of the term "officials of the United Nations" for thepurpose of application of the Convention on the Privileges and Im-munities of the United Nations 183

24. Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the United Nations andConvention on the Privileges and Immunities of the Specialized Agen-

^cies—Question whether under those Conventions a Host State isj required to extend full diplomatic privileges to high officials of the

organization concerned who are its nationals or permanent residents . . 184

25. Question of the financial responsibility to the Organization of membersof the staff for accidental damage caused to United Nations vehicleswhile driving such vehicles—Policy of the Organization in this respect 186

26. Immunity of staff members and their immediate families from im-migration restrictions and from exclusion and deportation proceedingsunder the Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the UnitedNations, the Headquarters Agreement between the United Nations andthe United States and the immigration law of the United States 188

27. Question whether a United Nations official may be granted specialleave to complete military service in his country of origin, in the lightof the relevant provisions of the Convention on the Privileges andImmunities of the United Nations and of Appendix C of the StaffRules 190

28. Exemption from taxation of salaries and emoluments of United Nationsofficials by virtue of relevant provisions of the Convention on thePrivileges and Immunities of the United Nations and applicable Gen-eral Assembly resolutions with particular reference to the position ofmembers of the Secretariat at United Nations Headquarters in NewYork 191

29. Policy of the United Nations regarding requests from governmentalauthorities for testimony of staff members not having diplomatic status 192

30. Legal validity of the use by a staff member of the United Nations ofa name other than that acquired at birth in the light of New York lawwhich as the law of the staff member's residence is the applicable lawin this matter 193

Registration of treaties with the Secretariat of the United Nationsunder Article 102 of the Charter—Question whether terminated treatiesshould be registered 194

Depositary functions of the Secretary-General—Rule that any acthaving the purpose of modifying the application of a treaty mustemanate from one of the authorities empowered to bind the Stateinternationally 195

xii


33. Participation of Belgium and Luxembourg in multilateral treatiesdeposited with the Secretary-General, in the light of their membershipin the Belgo-Luxembourg Economic Union 196

34. Depositary practice of the Secretary-General regarding the participationof new States in treaties applied to their territoiy prior to indepen-dence—Requirement that a decision of succession be communicatedto the depositary in the form of a notification emanating from theHead of State, Head of Government or Minister for Foreign Affairs . . 199

35. Status in regard to the International Cocoa Agreement 1972 of anewly independent State to whose territory the Agreement had beenextended prior to independence ( 1 ) during the ninety-day period withinwhich such a State may notify the Secretary-General that it assumesthe rights and obligations of a contracting party; or (2) after thisperiod has expired without such a notification having been made . . . . 201

36. Participation in the International Coffee Agreement 1968—Position ofthe Secretary-General, as depositary of the Agreement, with respectto entities the status of which is unclear 202

37. Depositary practice of the Secretary-General when he receives, in con-nexion with a multilateral treaty not containing a reservations clause,an instrument which includes reservations 203

38. International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights—Ful-filment of the conditions provided for by article 27 ( 1 ) of the Covenantfor the purpose of its entry into force 205

39. Reservations or declarations made by States at the time of signing,ratifying or acceding to multilateral conventions in respect of whichthe Secretary-General performs depositary functions Practice followedby the depositary regarding communications the nature of which isunclear, in the case of conventions providing for a specific procedureto be applied in respect of reservations 206

B. LEGAL OPINIONS OF THE SECRETARIATS OF INTERGOVERNMENTAL ORGAN-IZATIONS RELATED TO THE UNITED NATIONS

1. World Health OrganizationAttachment of terminal emoluments of a staff member 207

2. Universal Postal UnionLiability in respect of damage caused by a correspondence item or by

a postal parcel to other postal items (1969 Tokyo Convention,article 42, and Postal Parcels Agreement, article 41) 208

Part Three. Judicial decisions on questions relating to the UnitedNations and related intergovernmental organizations

CHAPTER VII. DECISIONS AND ADVISORY OPINIONS OF INTERNATIONAL TRIBUNALS 213

xiii


CHAPTER VIII. DECISIONS OF NATIONAL TRIBUNALS

1. AustriaAdministrative Court of Vienna (Verwaltungsgerichtshof)

X. v. Vienna Federal Police Board: Decision of 11 April 1975

Scope of the immunity from legal process enjoyed by officials of theInternational Atomic Energy Agency in Austria under the Agency'sHeadquarters Agreement 214

2. Switzerland

Cantonal Tribunal of the Canton of Vaud, Civil Court

X. v. Y.: Judgement of 14 March 1975Suit against an official of the World Health Organization enjoying im-

munity from legal process in Switzerland under the WHO Head-quarters Agreement—Cross-petition by the defendant designed inparticular to have the original suit declared inadmissible by reasonof the incompetence of the Tribunal—Object of the privileges andimmunities granted to WHO officials under the above-mentionedHeadquarters Agreement—Granting of time for the opposing partyto take the steps necessary for the waiving of the immunity 215

Part Four. Bibliography

LEGAL BIBLIOGRAPHY OF THE UNITED NATIONS AND RELATED INTERGOVERN-MENTAL ORGANIZATIONS

A. INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS IN GENERAL

1. General 220

2. Particular questions 220

B. UNITED NATIONS

1. General 221

2. Particular organs

Administrative Tribunal 223

General Assembly 223

International Court of Justice 224

Regional economic commissions 226

Secretariat 226

Security Council 227

United Nations Forces 227

United Nations Industrial Development Organization 227

3. Particular questions or activities

Charter revision 227

xiv


Civil war 228

Collective security 228

Commercial arbitration 228

Consular relations 230

Definition of aggression 230

Diplomatic relations 230

Disarmament 230

Domestic jurisdiction 232

Environmental questions 232

Financing 234

Friendly relations and co-operation among States 234

Human rights 235

International criminal law 238

International economic law 239

International terrorism 241

International trade law 242

International waterways 243Intervention 244

Law of the sea 245

Law of treaties 254

Law of war 256Maintenance of peace 259

Membership and representation 259

Most-favoured-nation clause 259

Namibia 260

Narcotic drugs 260

Non-self-governing territories 260

Outer space 260

Peaceful settlement of disputes 262

Political and security questions 262

Progressive development and codification of international law (in

general) 263

Recognition of States 264

Refugees 264

Right of asylum 264

Rule of law 265

xv

CONTENTS (continued)

Page

Self-determination 265

Social defence 266

State responsibility 266

State sovereignty 266

State succession 267

Technical assistance 267

Trade and development 267

Use of force 268

C. INTERGOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS RELATED TO THE UNITED NATIONS

Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations 268

General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 270

Inter-Governmental Maritime Consultative Organization 271

International Atomic Energy Agency 273

International Civil Aviation Organization 274

International Labour Organisation 276

International Monetary Fund 277

United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization . . . 277

Universal Postal Union 278

World Bank 278

International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes 278

World Health Organization 278

xvi

FOREWORD

By its resolution 1814 (XVII) of 18 December 1962, the General Assemblyrequested the Secretary-General to publish a Juridical Yearbook which would includecertain documentary materials of a legal character concerning the United Nations andrelated intergovernmental organizations, and by its resolution 3006 (XXVII) of18 December 1972 the General Assembly made certain changes in the outline of theYearbook.

Chapters I and II of the present volume—the thirteenth of the series—containlegislative texts and treaty provisions relating to the legal status of the United Nationsand related intergovernmental organizations. With a few exceptions, the legislative textsand treaty provisions which are included in these two chapters entered into forcein 1975. Decisions given in 1975 by international and national tribunals relating tothe legal status of the various organizations are found in chapters VII and VIII.

Chapter III contains a general review of the legal activities of the United Nationsand related intergovernmental organizations; each organization has prepared thesection which relates to it.

Chapter IV is devoted to treaties concerning international law concluded underthe auspices of the organizations concerned during the year in question, whether ornot they entered into force in that year. This criterion has been used in order toreduce in some measure the difficulty created by the sometimes considerable time-lagbetween the conclusion of treaties and their publication in the United Nations TreatySeries following upon entry into force.

Finally, the bibliography lists works and articles of a legal character publishedin 1975 regardless of the period to which they refer. Some works and articles whichwere not included in the bibliographies of the Juridical Yearbook for previous yearshave also been listed.

All documents published in the Juridical Yearbook were supplied by the organ-izations concerned, with the exception of the legislative texts and judicial decisions inchapters I and VIII which, unless otherwise indicated, were communicated by Gov-ernments at the request of the Secretary-General.

xvn

ABBREVIATIONS

ACC Administrative Committee on Co-ordinationBIRPI United International Bureaux for the Protection of Intellectual PropertyCMEA Council for Mutual Economic AssistanceECAFE Economic Commission for Asia and the Far East

ECE Economic Commission for Europe

ECWA Economic Commission for Western Asia

EEC European Economic CommunityESCAP Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific

FAO Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations

GATT General Agreement on Tariffs and TradeIAEA International Atomic Energy Agency

ICAO International Civil Aviation Organization

ICSC International Civil Service Commission

ICSID International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes

ILO International Labour Organisation

IMCO Inter-governmental Maritime Consultative Organization

IPPC International Penal and Penitentiary Commission

ITU International Telecommunication Union

OAS Organization of American States

OAU Organization of African Unity

ONUC United Nations Operation in the Congo

PAHO Pan American Health Organization

UNDOF United Nations Disengagement Observer Force

UNDP United Nations Development Programme

UNEF United Nations Emergency Force

UNEP United Nations Environment Programme

UNESCO United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization

UNHCR United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees

UNICEF United Nations Children's Fund

UNITAR United Nations Institute for Training and Research

UPU Universal Postal Union

WHO World Health Organization

WIPO World Intellectual Property Organization

WMO World Meteorological Organization

xviii

Part One

LEGAL STATUS OF THE UNITED NATIONSAND RELATED INTERGOVERNMENTAL

ORGANIZATIONS

Chapter I

LEGISLATIVE TEXTS CONCERNING THE LEGAL STATUS OF THEUNITED NATIONS AND RELATED INTERGOVERNMENTAL ORGAN-IZATIONS

1. Canada

PRIVILEGES AND IMMUNITIES (INTERNATIONALORGANIZATIONS) ACT

F.A.O. (N.A.F.C.—STH SESSION) PRIVILEGES AND IMMUNITIES ORDER, 1975P.C. 1975-2693 18 November, 1975

His Excellency the Governor General in Council, on the recommendationof the Secretary of State for External Affairs, pursuant to section 3 of thePrivileges and Immunities (International Organizations) Act,1 is pleased herebyto make the annexed Order respecting the Privileges and Immunities in Canadaof the Eighth Session of the North American Forestry Commission of the Foodand Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.

ORDER RESPECTING THE PRIVILEGES AND IMMUNITIES IN CANADA OF THE EIGHTH SES-SION OF THE NORTH AMERICAN FORESTRY COMMISSION OF THE FOOD AND AGRI-CULTURE ORGANIZATION OF THE UNITED NATIONS

[This Order is similar mutatis mutandis to the Order respecting the Privilegesand Immunities in Canada of the International Atomic Energy Agency, reproducedon p. 3 of the Juridical Yearbook, 1973.]

2. Mauritius

ORDER2 MADE BY THE MINISTER UNDER DECISION 19 OF THEINTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS AND CONFERENCES (PRIVI-LEGES AND IMMUNITIES) ACT, 1970

1. This Order may be cited as the International Atomic Energy Agency (Privi-leges and Immunities) Order 1975.

2. In this Order:

1 See United Nations Legislative Series, Legislative Texts and treaty provisions concerningthe legal status, privileges and immunities of international organizations (ST/LEG/SER.B/10), p. 10; and Juridical Yearbook, 1965, p. 3.

? Covernment Notice No. 33 of 1975.

"Act" means the International Organizations and Conferences (Privilegesand Immunities) Act, 1970;

"Agency" means the International Atomic Energy Agency;

"official", in relation to the Agency, means an official whose name anddescription has, in accordance with Articles VI of the Agreement of thePrivileges and Immunities of the Agency,3 been notified to the Minister.

3. Part V of the Act shall apply to the Agency.4. (1) The Agency, its property and assets, wherever located and by whom-

soever held, shall enjoy immunity from every form of legal process except in so faras in any particular case, other than a measure of execution, it has expressly waivedits immunity.

(2) The premises of the Agency shall be inviolable.

(3) The property and assets of the Agency, wherever located and by whom-soever held, shall be immune from search, requisition, confiscation, expropriationand any other form of interference, whether by executive, administrative, judicialor legislative action.

(4) The archives of the Agency, and in general all documents belonging to itor held by it, shall be inviolable, wherever located.

(5) Without being restricted by financial controls, regulations or moratoria ofany kind but subject to subparagraph (6)—

(a) the Agency may hold funds, gold or currency of any kind and operateaccounts in any currency;

(b) the Agency may freely transfer its funds, gold or currency from Mauritiusto another country or vice versa or within Mauritius and convert any currency heldby it into any other currency.

(6) The Agency shall, in exercising its rights under subparagraph (5) pay dueregard to any representations made to the Government of Mauritius in so far as it isconsidered that effect can be given to such representations without detriment to theinterests of the Agency.

(7) The Agency, its assets, income and other property shall be—

(a) exempt from all direct taxes other than taxes which are charges for publicutility services;

(b) exempt from customs duties and prohibitions and restrictions on importsand exports in respect of articles imported or exported by the Agency for its officialuse, but articles imported under such exemption will not be sold in Mauritius exceptunder conditions agreed to with the Government of Mauritius;

(c) exempt from duties and prohibitions and restrictions on imports and exportsin respect of its publications.

5. The Agency shall enjoy for its official communications, treatment not lessfavourable than that accorded to any other Government in the matter of priorities,rates and taxes for posts and telecommunications and press rates for information tothe press and radio.

6. (1) Every official of the Agency shall—

(a) be immune from legal process in respect of words spoken or written andall acts performed by him in his official capacity;

3 United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 374, p. 147.

4

(b) enjoy the same exemptions from taxation in respect of the salaries andemoluments paid to him by the Agency and on the same conditions as are enjoyedby officials of the United Nations;

(c) be immune, together with his spouse and relatives dependent on him, fromimmigration restrictions;

(d) be accorded the same privileges in respect of exchange facilities as areaccorded to an official of comparable rank of a diplomatic mission;

(e) be given, together with his spouse and relatives dependent on him, the samerepatriation facilities in time of international crises as an official of comparable rankof a diplomatic mission;

(/) have the right to import free of duty his furniture and effects at the timeof first taking up his post in Mauritius.

(2) In addition to the privileges and immunities specified in subparagraph (1),the Director General of the Agency, including any official acting on his behalf duringhis absence from duty, shall be accorded on behalf of himself, his spouse and minorchildren, the privileges and immunities, exemptions and facilities accorded to diplo-matic envoys on behalf of themselves, their spouses and minor children, in accordancewith international law. The same privileges and immunities, exemptions and facilitiesshall also be accorded to a Deputy Director General or official of equivalent rank ofthe Agency.

(3) The Agency shall have the right and the duty to waive the immunity ofany official in any case where, in its opinion, the immunity would impede the courseof justice and can be waived without prejudice to the interests of the Agency.

(4) The Agency shall co-operate at all times with the appropriate authoritiesof Mauritius to facilitate the proper administration of justice, secure the observanceof police regulations and prevent the occurrence of any abuses in connexion with theprivileges, immunities and facilities mentioned in this paragraph.

7. (1) Every expert other than an official serving on a committee of theAgency or performing a mission for the Agency shall, so fax as is necessary for theeffective exercise of his functions, be granted—

(a) immunity from personal arrest or detention and from seizure of his personalbaggage;

(6) in respect of words spoken or written or acts done by him in the perform-ance of his official functions, immunity from legal process of every kind;

(c) inviolability for all papers and documents;

(d) for the purposes of his communications with the Agency, the right to usecodes and to receive papers or correspondence by courrier or in sealed bags;

(e) the same facilities in respect of currency and exchange restrictions as areaccorded to representatives of foreign Government on temporary official mission;

(/) the same immunities and facilities in respect of his personal baggage as areaccorded to members of comparable rank of diplomatic missions.

(2) The Agency shall have the right and the duty to waive the immunity ofany expert in any case where in its opinion the immunity would impede the courseof justice and can be waived without prejudice to the interests of the Agency.

8. (1) Every official of the Agency shall be entitled to use the United Nationslaissez-passer in conformity with administrative arrangements concluded between theDirector General of the Agency and the Secretary-General! of the United Nations.

The Director General of the Agency shall notify the Minister of the administrativearrangements so concluded.

(2) Every application for a visa, where required from an official of the Agencyholding a United Nations laissez-passer, when accompanied by a certificate that heis travelling on the business of the Agency shall be dealt with as speedily as possibleand that person shall be granted facilities for speedy travel.

(3) The facilities specified in subparagraph (2) shall be accorded to everyexpert and other person who, though not a holder of a United Nations laissez-passer,has a certificate that he is traveling on the business of the Agency.

(4) The Director General, the Deputy-Directors General and other officials ofa rank not lower than head of division of the Agency, travelling on United Nationslaissez-passer on the business of the Agency, shall be granted the same facilities fortravel as are accorded to officials of comparable rank in diplomatic missions.

Made by the Minister on 17 March 1975.

3. Papua New Guinea

UNITED NATIONS AND SPECIALIZED AGENCIES(PRIVILEGES AND IMMUNITIES) ACT 19754

An Act relating to the privileges and immunities of the United Nations and theSpecialized Agencies, and for other purposes,

MADE by the House of Assembly to come into operation on a date to be fixedby the High Commissioner by notice published in the Government Gazette.

PART I. PRIVILEGES AND IMMUNITIES OF THE UNITED NATIONS

1. DEFINITION

In this Part, "the Convention" means the General Convention on the Privilegesand Immunities of the United Nations which was adopted by the General Assemblyof the United Nations on 13 February 1946 and a copy of which is set out inSchedule 1.

2. UNITED NATIONS TO BE A CORPORATION, ETC.

(1) The United Nations—

(a) is a corporation with perpetual succession; and

(£) has the capacity to contract; and

(c) is capable, in its corporate name, of acquiring, holding and disposing ofreal and personal property and of instituting legal proceedings.

(2) All courts, judges and persons acting judicially in Papua New Guineashall take judicial notice of the seal of the United Nations affixed to a document andshall presume that it was duly affixed.

* No. 66 of 1975.

3. PRIVILEGES AND IMMUNITIES

The United Nations or a person in relation to whom the Convention applies has,in Papua New Guinea, the privileges and immunities applicable under the Conventionto the United Nations or that person, as the case may be.

4. EVIDENCE

A certificate under the hand of the Minister certifying that, on a specified dateor during a specified period—

(a) a specified country was a Member of the United Nations; or(b) a specified body was a principal or subsidiary organ of the United Nations;

or

(c) a specified conference was a conference convened by the United Nations;or

(d) a specified person was—(i) a representative of a Member of the United Nations to an organ of the

United Nations or a conference convened by the United Nations; or

(ii) included in a category of officials of the United Nations to which theprovisions of Articles V and VII of the Convention applied; or

(iii) an expert (other than an official coming within the scope of Article Vof the Convention) performing a mission for the United Nations,

is evidence of the matter so certified.

PART II. PRIVILEGES AND IMMUNITIES OF THE SPECIALIZED AGENCIES

5. DEFINITIONS

In this Part, unless the contrary intention appears —"Specialized Agency" means—(a) the International Labour Organisation; and

(6) the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations; and(c) the International Civil Aviation Organization; and(d) the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization;

and(e) the International Monetary Fund; and(/) the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development; and(g) the World Health Organization; and(h) the Universal Postal Union; and(/) the International Telecommunications Union; and(/) the World Meteorological Organization; and(k) the Inter-Governmental Maritime Consultive Organization; and(/) the International Finance Corporation; and

(ni) the International Development Association;"the Convention" means the Convention, as modified by the Annexes, a

copy of which is set out in Schedule 2.

6. JURIDICAL PERSONALITY OF SPECIALIZED AGENCIES

(1) Each Specialized Agency—(a) is a corporation with perpetual succession; and

(b) has the capacity to contract; and

(c) is capable, in its corporate name, of acquiring, holding and disposing ofreal and personal property and of instituting legal proceedings.

(2) All courts, judges and persons acting judicially in Papua New Guinea shalltake judicial notice of the seal of a Specialized Agency affixed to a document andshall presume that it was duly affixed.

7. PRIVILEGES AND IMMUNITIES

(1) Each Specialized Agency and each person in relation to whom the Conven-tion applies has, in Papua New Guinea, the privileges and immunities applicableunder the Convention (other than those referred to in Section 11 of the Convention)to that Specialized Agency or that person, as the case may be.

(2) A Specialized Agency has the right to avail itself, for telegraphic com-munications sent by it and containing only matters for publication by the press orfor broadcasting (including communications addressed to or despatched from placesoutside Papua New Guinea), or the reduced rates applicable for the despatch ofpress telegrams.

8. EVIDENCE

A certificate under the hand of the Minister certifying that, on a specified dateor during a specified period—

(a) a specified State, country or Government was a Member of a SpecializedAgency; or

(6) a specified meeting was a meeting convened by a Specialized Agency or ameeting withing the meaning of Subsection (vi) or Section 1 of the Convention; or

(c) a specified person was—(i) a representative of a Member of a Specialized Agency at a meeting referred

to in paragraph (6); or(ii) included in a category of officials of a Specialized Agency to which the

provisions of Articles VI and VIII of the Convention applied; or(iii) on the grounds stated in the certificate, a person entitled under the Con-

vention to privileges and immunities applicable under the Convention,is evidence of the matter so certified.

PART III. MISCELLANEOUS

9. PROTECTION OF NAMES, ETC.

(1) Except with the consent in writing of the Minister, a person (including acorporation) shall not—

(«) use the name or an abbreviation of the United Nations or a SpecializedAgency in connexion with a trade, business, profession, calling or occupation; or

(6) use—(i) a seal, emblem or device that is identical with the official seal or emblem

of the United Nations or a Specialized Agency; or

8

(ii) a seal, emblem or device so nearly resembling the official seal or emblemof the United Nations or a Specialized Agency as to be capable of beingmistaken for that seal or emblem; or

(iii) a seal, emblem or device that is capable of being taken to be the officialseal or emblem of the United Nations or a Specialized Agency.

Penalty: K 100.00.(2) Where, without the consent in writing of the Minister, the name or an

abbreviation of the name of the United Nations or a Specialized Agency, or a seal,emblem or device referred to in Subsection (1) (&)—

(a) is used as, or as part of, the name, seal or emblem of an association; or(b) is used as, or as part of, the name or emblem of a newspaper or magazine

owned by, or published by or on behalf of, an association; or(c) is used by an association in connexion with any activity of the association

so as to imply that the association is in any way connected with that organization,

then—

(d) if the association is a corporation—the association; or(e) if the association is not a corporation—every member of the governing

body of the association,

is guilty of an offence.

Penalty: K 100.00.

(3) A person shall not be convicted of an offence against this section in respectof the use of an abbreviation of the name of the United Nations or a SpecializedAgency if the use occurred in such circumstances or in relation to such matters asto be unlikely to be taken to imply any connexion with the organization, unless theprosecution proves that the use was intended to imply such a connexion.

(4) The conviction of a person of an offence under this section in respect ofthe use of a name, abbreviation of a name, seal, emblem or device does not preventa further conviction of that person in respect of the use of that name, abbreviation,seal, emblem or device at any time after the first-mentioned conviction.

(5) For the purposes of this section—

(a) any combination of words or letters, or of both words and letters, that iscapable of being understood as referring to the United Nations or a Specialized Agencyshall be deemed to be an abbreviation of the name of the United Nations or thatSpecialized Agency, as the case may be; and

(b) if a seal or emblem is declared by regulations made under this Act to bethe official seal or emblem of the United Nations or a Specialized Agency, that sealor emblem shall be taken to be the official seal or emblem of the United Nationsor that Specialized Agency, as the case may be.

(6) Proceedings under this section shall not be instituted without the consentin writing of the Minister for Justice.

10. REGULATIONS

The High Commissioner in Council may make regulations, not inconsistent withthis Act, prescribing all matters that by this Act are required or permitted to beprescribed, or that are necessary or convenient to be prescribed, for carrying out orgiving effect to this Act.

SCHEDULE 1

CONVENTION ON THE PRIVILEGES AND IMMUNITIES OF THE UNITED NATIONS

[Not reproduced]5

SCHEDULE 2

CONVENTION ON THE PRIVILEGES AND IMMUNITIES OF THE SPECIALIZED AGENCIES

[Not reproduced]6

5 United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 1, p. 15.« Ibid., vol. 33, p. 261.

10

Chapter II

TREATY PROVISIONS CONCERNING THE LEGAL STATUS OF THEUNITED NATIONS AND RELATED INTERGOVERNMENTAL ORGAN-IZATIONS

A. Treaty provisions concerning the legal status of the United Nations

1. CONVENTION ON THE PRIVILEGES AND IMMUNITIES OF THEUNITED NATIONS.1 APPROVED BY THE GENERAL ASSEMBLYOF THE UNITED NATIONS ON 13 FEBRUARY 1946

The following States acceded to the Convention on the Privileges and Immunitiesof the United Nations in 1975:2

Date of receipt of instru-State ment of accession?

Papua New Guinea 4 December 1975 dZambia 16 June 1975 d

This brought up to 112 the number of States parties to this Convention.

2. AGREEMENTS RELATING TO MEETINGS AND INSTALLATIONS

(a) Agreement between the United Nations and Austria regarding the arrange-ments for the United Nations Conference on the Representatives of Statesin their Relations with International Organizations to be held at Viennafrom 4 February to 14 March 1975.4 Signed at New York on 22 January1975

ARTICLE XIII

Privileges and immunities

1. The provisions relating to privileges and immunities in the Agreement betweenthe United Nations and the Republic of Austria regarding the headquarters of theUNIDO5 shall be applicable with regard to the Conference. The Convention on thePrivileges and Immunities of the United Nations is hereby not affected.

1 United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 1,-p. 15.2 The Convention is in force in regard to each State which deposited an instrument of

accession with the Secretary-General of the United Nations as from the date of its deposit.3 The symbol "d" immediately following the date appearing opposite the name of a

State denotes a declaration by that State recognizing itself bound, as from the date of itsindependence, by the Convention, the application of which had been extended to its ter-ritory by a State then responsible for the conduct of its foreign relations. The date shownis the date of receipt by the Secretary-General of the notification to that effect.

4 Came into force on the date of signature.5 United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 600, p. 93. Also reproduced in the Juridical Year-

book, 1967, p. 44.

11

2. Representatives of States invited to attend the Conference, officials of theUnited Nations performing functions in connexion with the Conference, experts onmission for the United Nations at the Conference and representatives of the specializedagencies, the International Atomic Energy Agency and other intergovernmental organ-izations invited to attend the Conference shall enjoy the same privileges and immu-nities as are accorded to representatives to meetings of the UNIDO and to officialsof the UNIDO under the Agreement outlined in paragraph 1.

3. Without prejudice to the provisions of paragraph 2 of this article, observersinvited by the United Nations to attend the Conference shall enjoy immunity fromlegal process in respect of words spoken or written or any act performed by them intheir official capacity in connexion with the Conference.

4. Personnel provided by the Government under article X of this Agreementshall enjoy immunity from legal process in respect of words spoken or written andany act performed by them in their official capacity in connexion with the Conferencewith the exception of those who are assigned to hourly rates. Such immunity shall,however, not apply in case of an accident caused by vehicle, vessel or aircraft.

5. Without prejudice to the preceding paragraphs of this article, representativesof non-governmental organizations invited by the United Nations to the Conferenceshall enjoy immunity from legal process in respect of words spoken or written orany act performed by them in the exercise of their functions in connexion with theConference.

6. The Government shall ensure that no impediment is imposed on transit toand from the Conference of the following categories of persons invited by the UnitedNations to attend the Conference: representatives of Governments and their immediatefamilies; officials and experts of the United Nations and their immediate families;observers invited to the Conference and their immediate families; observers of non-governmental organizations invited to the Conference and their immediate families;representatives of the press or of radio, television, film or other information agenciesaccredited by the United Nations in its discretion after consultation with the Govern-ment and other persons officially invited to the Conference by the United Nations.

7. All persons referred to in this article and all persons performing functionsin connexion with the Conference who are not nationals of Austria shall have theright of entry into and exit from Austria. Visas and entry permits, where required,shall be granted free of charge, as speedily as possible and, when applications aremade at least two and a half weeks before the opening of the Conference, not laterthan two weeks before the date of the opening of the Conference. If the applicationfor the visa is not made at least two and a half weeks before the opening of theConference, the visa shall be granted not later than three days from the receipt ofthe application.

8. During the Conference, including the preparatory and final stage of theConference, the buildings and areas referred to in article I shall be deemed to constituteUnited Nations premises and access thereto shall be subject to the authority and controlof the United Nations.

ARTICLE XIV

Liability

The Government shall be responsible for dealing with any actions, claims orother demands arising out of:

(a) injury or damage to person or property in the premises referred to inarticle I above;

12

(b) injury or damage to person or property caused by, or incurred in using,the transportation referred to in article IX above;

(c) the employment for the Conference of the personnel referred to in article Xabove;

and the Government shall hold the United Nations and its personnel harmless in respectof any such actions, claims or other demands.

(/>) Agreement between the United Nations Industrial Development Organi-zation and Austria regarding the Headquarters of the United NationsIndustrial Development Organization. Signed at New York on 13 April1967

Exchange of notes constituting a supplemental agreement between the UnitedNations Industrial Development Organization and Austria to the above-mentionedagreement, relating to the value-addex tax.6 Vienna, 22 January 1975

Letter from the Executive Director of theUnited Nations Industrial Development Organization

22 January 1975

The Agreement between the United Nations Industrial Development Organizationand the Republic of Austria regarding the Headquarters of the United Nations Indus-trial Development Organization (hereinafter referred to as "the Headquarters Agree-ment") provides in its Section 16 (a) :

"The UNIDO, its assets, income and other property shall be exempt fromall forms of taxation, provided, however, that such tax exemption shall notextend to the owner or lessor of any property rented by the UNIDO."The Headquarters Agreement provides further in its Section 16 (b), inter alia:

"In so far as the Government, for important administrative considerations,may be unable to grant to the UNIDO exemption from indirect taxes whichconstitute part of the cost of goods purchased by or services rendered to theUNIDO, including rentals, the Government shall reimburse the UNIDO for suchtaxes by the payment, from time to time, of lump sums to be agreed upon bythe UNIDO and the Government. It is, however, understood that the UNIDOwill not claim reimbursement with respect to minor purchases. . ."

In consideration of the fact that the turnover tax system in Austria was changedwith effect from 1 January 1973, I have the honour to propose that the provisionsquoted above shall be implemented as follows with respect to the new turnover taxsystem (value-added tax system) :

1. The Austrian Federal Government (hereinafter referred to as "the Govern-ment") shall reimburse the United Nations Industrial Development Organization((hereinafter referred to as "the UNIDO") the turnover tax on goods delivered orservices rendered to the UNIDO including rentals. The UNIDO shall not claim reim-bursement of the turnover tax for goods delivered or services rendered of a net value,excluding the turnover tax, of less than AS1.000.

2. Reimbursement of the turnover tax shall be made on the basis of lists of allgoods delivered and services rendered subject to reimbursement in accordance with

«Came into force on 1 February 1975.

13

this Supplement Agreement. These lists shall cover periods of six months each andshall be transmitted by UNIDO to the Government. Upon request, the UNIDO shallpermit representatives of the Government to inspect the originals of the invoicesfor any such goods delivered and services rendered.

3. In the case of goods delivered to the Commissary, the turnover tax shall bereimbursed only for foodstuffs and alimentary products, and tobacco products; reim-bursement of the turnover tax for other goods shall be made only if such goods havebeen exempted from import duties in accordance with the provisions of the Head-quarters Agreement and the relevant Supplemental Agreements, and if appropriateevidence thereof can be furnished.

4. This Supplemental Agreement shall enter into force on 1 February 1975. Itshall apply to goods delivered and services rendered after 31 December 1972 andshall remain in force for the duration of the Headquarters Agreement.

If the Austrian Federal Government agrees to this proposal, I have the honourto propose that this note, together with your note reply confirming its acceptance,shall constitute an agreement between the UNIDO and the Government implementing,to this extent, the relevant provision of the Headquarters Agreement.

II

Letter from the Federal Minister for Foreign Affairsof Austria

22 January 1975

The Federal Government of the Republic of Austria has instructed me to acknow-ledge receipt of your Note dated 22 January 1975 which reads as follows:

[See letter /]

I have the honour to confirm that the Federal Government of the Republic ofAustria agrees with the proposal and that your note and this reply constitute a Sup-plemental Agreement implementing article VII, Section 16 (b) of the Agreementbetween the Republic of Austria and the United Nations regarding the Headquartersof the United Nations Industrial Development Organization of 13 April 1967.*

(c) Agreement between the United Nations and Iran regarding the arrange-ments for the Habitat Regional Preparatory Conference for Asia and thePacific, and Western Asia to be held at Teheran from 14 to 19 June1975.7 Signed at New York on 24 January 1975

ARTICLE IV

Facilities, privileges and immunities

1. For the purposes of the Conference, the Convention of 13 February 1946on the Privileges and Immunities of the United Nations, to which the Governmentof Iran is a party, shall apply. In respect of officials of the specialized agencies whoattend the Conference, the Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of theSpecialized Agencies,8 to which Iran is also a party, shall apply. Likewise, the provi-

* Provisional translation.7 Came into force on the date of signature.8 United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 33, p. 261.

14

sions of the Agreement on the Privileges and Immunities of the International AtomicEnergy Agency will apply as appropriate.9

2. The Government shall impose no impediment to transit to and from meetingsof any persons whose presence at the Conference is authorized by the United Nationsand shall grant any visas required for such persons promptly and without charge.

ARTICLE V

Liability

The Government shall be responsible for dealing with any actions, claims or otherdemands arising out of (a) injury or damage to person or property in the Conferencepremises; (b) injury or damage to person or property caused or incurred in usingtransportation provided by the Government; (c) the employment for the Conferenceof the personnel provided by the Government or in respect of which the Governmentfurnishes financial assistance, and the Government shall hold the United Nations andits personnel harmless in respect of any such actions, claims or other demands.

(//) Memorandum of understanding between the United Nations and Japanregarding arrangements for the fourth session of the United Nations Com-mittee on Natural Resources to be held at Tokyo from 24 March to 4April 1975.10 Signed at New York on 13 February 1975

VI. Liability

The Government will secure appropriate insurance, in relation to any activityconnected with the Conference, covering any damage that might occur in Japan toany participant and any claim that might be made against the United Nations or itsofficials.

VII. Privileges and immunities

1. The Conventions on the Privileges and Immunities of the United Nationsand of the Specialized Agencies, to which Japan is a party, will be applicable withrespect to the Conference, and to the participants therein.

2. During the period of the Conference, the area referred to in the paragraph 1of I above will be made available for the exclusive use of the United Nations and,therefore, will be deemed to constitute premises of the United Nations.

3. The Government will impose no impediment to transit to and from theConference of the following categories of persons attending the Conference; representa-tives of States and their immediate families; representatives of specialized agencies andintergovernmental organizations and their immediate families; officials of the UnitedNations and their immediate families; observers of the non-governmental organizationswho may be invited to attend the Conference; representatives of the Press or of radio,television, film or other information agencies accredited by the United Nations at itsdiscretion after consultation with the Government; and other persons officially invitedto the Conference by the United Nations. Any visa required for such persons will begranted promptly and without charge.

4. The Government will take necessary measures to ensure, in accordance withthe provisions of the Convention of the Privileges and Immunities of the United

*lbid., vol. 374, p. 147.10 Came into force on the date of signature.

15

Nations, (a) the exemption from customs duties and prohibitions and restrictions onimports and exports of articles imported or exported by the United Nations for itsofficial use, and (b) the issuance of necessary import and export permits withoutdelay with respect to all supplies needed by the United Nations for the Conference,including those required for official entertainment.

(<?) Agreement between the United Nations and India regarding arrangementsfor the thirty-first session of the Economic and Social Commission forAsia and the Pacific to be held at New Delhi from 26 February to 7 March1975.11 Signed at New Delhi on 25 February 1975

ARTICLE VI


1. The Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the United Nationsshall be fully applicable with respect to the Conference. In particular, the Governmentshall accord representatives attending the Conference and all officials of the UnitedNations the privileges and immunities set forth, respectively, in Articles IV and Vof the said Convention.

2. Officials of the Specialized Agencies shall enjoy the privileges and immunitiesprovided under the Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the SpecializedAgencies.

3. Without prejudice to the provisions of the preceding paragraph all participantsand all persons performing functions in connexion with the Conference shall enjoysuch privileges and immunities, facilities and courtesies as are necessary for the inde-pendent exercise of their functions in connexion with the Conference.

4. Representatives of Member and Associate Member States of the UnitedNations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific and representativesor observers from other States Members of the United Nations shall enjoy privilegesand immunities provided in Article IV of the Convention on the Privileges and Immu-nities of the United Nations. Observers of members of the Specialized Agencies shallenjoy the privileges and immunities provided for representatives in Article V of theConvention on the Privileges and Immunities of the Specialized Agencies.

5. All persons referred to in this article and all persons performing functionsin connexion with the Conference who are not nationals of India shall have theright of entry into and exit from India. They shall be granted facilities for speedytravel. Visas and entry permits, where required, shall be granted free of charge, asspeedily as possible and not later than two weeks before the date of the opening ofthe Conference when applications are made at least two and a half weeks before theopening of the Conference; if the application for the visa is not made at least twoand a half weeks before the opening of the Conference, the visa shall be granted notlater than three days from the receipt of the application. Arrangements will also bemade to ensure that visas for the duration of the Conference are delivered at theairport to participants who were unable to obtain them prior to their arrival. Exitpermits, where required, shall be granted free of charge as speedily as possible, inany case not later than three days before the closing of the Conference.

11 Came into force on the date of signature.

16

ARTICLE VII

Liability for claims

The Government shall be responsible for dealing with any actions, claims orother demands arising out of:

(a) injury or damage to person or property in the premises referred to inArticle I;

(6) The employment of the personnel referred to in Article V of this Agree-ment;and the Government shall hold the United Nations and its personnel harmless inrespect of any such actions, claims or other demands except when it is agreed bythe parties hereto that such damage or injury was caused by the gross negligence orwilful misconduct of the United Nations personnel.

(/) Agreement between the United Nations and Venezuela regarding the arrange-ments for the Habitat Regional Preparatory Conference for Latin Americato be held at Caracas, Venezuela, from 30 June to 4 July 1975.12 Signedat New York on 7 April 1975

This agreement contains provisions similar to articles IV and V of the Agreementreproduced under (c) above.

(g) Agreement between the United Nations and Sweden regarding arrange-ments or the Seminar on "Alternatives to Imprisonment" to be held atStockholm from 26 to 30 May 1975.13 Signed at New York on 29 April1975 and 1 May 1975

1. The Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the United Nationsshall be applicable in respect of the Seminar. Accordingly, officials and experts of theUnited Nations performing functions in connexion with or participating in the Seminarshall enjoy the privileges and immunities provided under Articles V, VI and VII ofthe said Convention.

2. Without prejudice to the provisions of the Convention on the Privileges andImmunities of the United Nations, all participants and all persons performing func-tions in connexion with the Seminar shall enjoy such privileges and immunities,facilities and courtesies as are necessary for the independent exercise of their functionsin connexion with the Seminar.14

3. All persons enumerated in Articles I and II of the Agreement and all personsperforming functions in connexion with the Seminar who are not nationals of Swedenshall have the facilities for speedy travel. Visas and entry permits, where required,shall be granted free of charge, as speedily as possible, and when applications aremade at least two and a half weeks before the opening of the Seminar, not later thantwo weeks before the date of the opening of the Seminar. If the application for thevisa is not made at least two and a half weeks before the opening of the Seminar thevisa shall be granted not later than three days from the receipt of the application.

(K) Agreement between the United Nations and Egypt regarding the arrange-ments for the Habitat Regional Preparatory Conference for Africa, to be

12 Came into force on the date of signature.13 Came into force on 1 May 1975.14 In a letter dated 15 April 1975, the Swedish Government indicated that it interpreted

this paragraph in such a way that the commitment therein was fulfilled already by thefreedom of expression and freedom of movement that was generally offered foreign subjectsin Sweden.

17

held at Cairo from 20 to 26 June 1976.15 Signed at New York on 1 May1975

This agreement contains provisions similar to Articles IV and V of the agreementreferred to under (c) above.

(/) Exchange of notes constituting an agreement between the United Nationsand Canada on the Interregional Technical Seminar on Remote SensingApplications, to be held in Guelph and Ottawa, Ontario, Canada, from 12to 30 May 1975 (with Understanding annexed).16 New York, 9 May 1975

ARTICLE V

Facilities, privileges and immunities

1. The Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the United Nationsshall be applicable in respect of the seminar. Accordingly, officials of the UnitedNations performing in connexion with the seminar shall enjoy the privileges andimmunities provided under Article V and VII of the said Convention.

2. Participants attending the seminar in pursuance of Article II (a) of thisUnderstanding shall be considered as experts on mission for the United Nations andenjoy the privileges and immunities provided under Article VI of the Convention onthe Privileges and Immunities of the United Nations.

3. Without prejudice to the provisions of the Convention on the Privileges andImmunities of the United Nations, all participants and all persons performing functionsin connexion with the seminar shall enjoy such facilities and courtesies as are necessaryfor the independent exercise of their functions in connexion with the seminar.

4. All persons enumerated in Article II of this Understanding and all personsperforming functions in connexion with the seminar who are not nationals of Canadashall have the right to entry into and exit from Canada. Visas shall be granted freeof charge, as speedily as possible so as to permit the applicant to participate at theseminar without inconvenience. Exit or entry permits, where required, shall be grantedfree of charge and without delay.

ARTICLE VI

Liability

1. The Government shall be responsible for dealing with any actions, claims,or other demands which may be brought against the United Nations arising out of:

(a) injury or damage to persons or property in the premises referred to inArticle IV 3 (a) and (6) above;

(b) injury or damage to persons or property caused by or incurred in usingthe transportation referred to in Article IV 3 (g);

(c) recruitment for the seminar of the personnel referred to in Article IV 2,IV 3 (d), (e) and IV 4;and the Government shall indemnify and hold harmless the United Nations and itsofficials in respect of any such actions, causes of action, claims or other demands.

2. The Government shall be subrogated to the rights and remedies of theUnited Nations in respect of any action, cause of action, claim or other demand

15 Came into force on the date of signature.16 Came into force on 9 May 1975.

18

referred to in Article VI 1 of this Understanding except that it is understood that theGovernment shall not be subrogated to the immunity from legal process enjoyed bythe United Nations.

3. The United Nations and the Government shall co-operate in the procure-ment of evidence for a fair hearing and disposal of actions, causes of action, claims,and other demands referred to in Article VI 1.

(/) Agreement between the United Nations and the Government of Mexicoregarding the arrangements for the World Conference of the InternationalWomen's Year, to be held at Mexico City, Mexico from 19 June to 2July 1975.17 Signed at Mexico City on 14 May 1975

ARTICLE X

Liability

The Government shall be responsible for dealing with any actions, claims orother demands against the United Nations arising out of:

(a) injury to person, or damage to or loss of property in the premises, includingdamage to the premises referred to in Article V above;

(b) injury to person, or damage to or loss of property caused by or incurredin using for the purpose of the Conference the transportation referred to in Article VIabove;

(c) the employment of the locally recruited personnel referred to in Articles VIand VIII above;

and the Government shall hold the United Nations and its personnel harmless inrespect of any such actions, claims or demands, except where it is agreed by theparties hereto that such damage, loss or injury is caused by the gross negligence orwilful misconduct of United Nations personnel.

ARTICLE XIPrivileges and immunities

1. The Convention of the Privileges and Immunities of the United Nationsshall be applicable in respect of the Conference in accordance with the accessionto the Convention by the Government of Mexico.

2. Representatives of States invited to the Conference shall enjoy the privilegesand immunities provided under article IV of the said Convention.

3. Officials of the United Nations and experts on mission for the United Nationsperforming functions in connexion with the Conference shall enjoy the privilegesand immunities provided under articles V, VI, and VII of the said Convention. Repre-sentatives of the specialized agencies and the International Atomic Energy Agencyand of other intergovernmental organizations invited to the Conference shall enjoythe same privileges and immunities as accorded to officials of comparable rank ofthe United Nations.

4. Without prejudice to the provisions of the Convention on the Privileges andImmunities of the United Nations, all persons performing functions directly connectedwith the Conference, including observers invited by the United Nations, shall enjoysuch privileges and immunities, facilities and courtesies as are necessary for theindependent exercise of their functions in connexion with the Conference.


19

5. The Government shall ensure that no impediment is imposed on transit toand from the site of the Conference of the following categories of persons;

(a) the persons referred to in article I of the present Agreement and theirfamilies, as well as members of the United Nations Secretariat and experts on missionfor the United Nations and their families;

(b) representatives of information media referred to in article II of the presentAgreement; and

(c) properly identified participants in recognized parallel activities referred toin article IV of the present Agreement.Any visa or documents required for entry or exit of such persons shall be grantedpromptly on application and without charge.

6. For the purpose of the application of the Convention on the Privileges andImmunities of the United Nations, conference premises shall be deemed to constitutepremises of the United Nations.

ARTICLE XII

Import duties and taxes

The Government shall allow the temporary importation of, and shall waiveimport duties and taxes for, all equipment and supplies necessary for the Conference.It shall issue without delay to the United Nations any necessary import and exportpermits. Such equipment and supplies shall not be sold in Mexico, except in accord-ance with the relevant provisions of Mexican law in force.

( k ) Agreement between the United Nations and the United States of Americaregarding the arrangements for the Second United Nations Symposium onthe Development and Use of Geothermal Resources to be held at SanFrancisco, United States of America, from 20 to 29 May 1975.18 Signedat New York on 15 May 1975

ARTICLE VI

Privileges, immunities and facilities

1. Officials and experts of the United Nations performing functions in connexionwith or participating in the Symposium shall enjoy the privileges and immunitiesprovided for such individuals under the Convention on the Privileges and Immunitiesof the United Nations or the International Immunities Act, Public Law 79-291, asamended.19

2. The federal, state or local authorities of the United States shall not imposeany impediments to transit to or from the Symposium of the persons attending theSymposium in accordance with Article III, and the appropriate authorities of thehost country shall afford any necessary protection to such persons while they arein transit or are attending the Symposium.

3. The Government shall give customs clearance between the port of entry andthe site of the Symposium for the documentation and supplies, required for the Sym-posium, which are entitled under the Convention on the Privileges and Immunities

into force on the date of signature.19 United Nations Legislative Series, Legislative Texts and Treaty Provisions concerning

the Legal Status, Privileges and Immunities of International Organizations (ST/LEG/SER.B/10; United Nations publication, Sales No.: 60.V.2), p. 128.

20

of the United Nations or the International Organizations Immunities Act of theUnited States to inviolability or to exemption from custom duties, or from prohibitionsor restrictions on imports and exports.

ARTICLE VII

Visas

\. Nominal rolls of the participants referred to in Article III shall be forwardedin due course by the United Nations to the Government through the United StatesMission to the United Nations.

2. Upon application for visas by duly invited or designated participants, asreferred to herein,

(a) when such application is made at least two and a half weeks before theopening of the session, visas shall be granted as speedily as possible, and free of charge,but not later than two weeks prior to the opening of the session; and

(b) when such application is not made at least two and a half weeks before theopening of the session, visas shall be granted as speedily as possible, and free of charge,but not later than three days from receipt of the application.

(/) Agreement between the United Nations and Costa Rica for the establish-ment of the Latin American Institute for the Protection of Crime and theTreatment of Offenders.20 Signed at New York on 11 July 1975

ARTICLE VII


1. Officials and experts of the Organization appointed to serve in the Instituteshall be accorded the privileges and immunities provided under Articles V, VI and VIIof the Convention on Privileges and Immunities of the United Nations, adopted bythe General Assembly on 13 February 1946. They shall enjoy the right of unhinderedentry into, and exit from, Costa Rica when travelling on official business.

2. The Government shall facilitate entry into, and exit from, Costa Rica of otherpersons participating in courses or other activities of the Institute, including thoseholding fellowships.

3. The archives and, in general, all documents belonging to the Institute or heldby it shall be inviolable.

4. The Institute, its assets, income and other property shall be exempt from(a) all direct tax; (b~) customs duties and prohibitions and restrictions on importsand exports in respect of articles imported or exported by the Institute for its officialuse, such articles not being for sale in Costa Rica except on the conditions agreed onby the Government; and (c) sales tax for purchases made on behalf of the Institute.

(m) Agreement between the United Nations and Kenya regarding the arrange-ments on the joint United Nations/World Meteorological OrganizationRegional Training Seminar on the interpretation, analysis and use ofmeteorological satellite data to be held at Nairobi, Kenya, from 6 to 17October 1975.21 Signed at New York on 3 October 1975

20 Came into force on the date of signature.21 Came into force on the date of signature.

21

ARTICLE V


1. The Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the United Nationsshall be applicable in respect of the seminar. Accordingly, officials of the UnitedNations performing functions in connexion with the seminar shall enjoy the privilegesand immunities provided under Articles V and VII of the said Convention.

2. Officials of the specialized agencies attending the seminar in pursuance ofparagraph (d) of Article II of this Agreement shall enjoy the privileges and immu-nities provided under Articles VI and VII of the Convention on the Privileges andImmunities of the Specialized Agencies.

3. Participants attending the seminar in pursuance of Article II (a) and (b)of this Agreement shall enjoy the privileges and immunities of experts on missionunder Article VI of the Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the UnitedNations.

4. Without prejudice to the provisions of the Convention on the Privileges andImmunities of the United Nations, all participants, including observers invited by theUnited Nations, and all persons performing functions in connexion with the seminarshall enjoy such privileges and immunities, facilities and courtesies as are necessaryfor the independent exercise of their functions in connexion with the seminar.

5. All persons enumerated in Article II of this Agreement and all personsperforming functions in connexion with the seminar who are not nationals of Kenyashall have the right of entry into and exit from Kenya. They shall be granted facilitiesfor speedy travel. Entry visas shall be granted free of charge, as speedily as possibleand within five days of an application being made. Exit permits, when required,shall be granted free of charge and without delay, in any case not later than threedays before the closing of the seminar.

ARTICLE VI

LiabilityThe Government shall be responsible for dealing with any actions, claims or

other demands arising out of (a) injury or damage to persons or property in thepremises referred to in Article IV 3 («) and (b) above; (b) injury or damage topersons or property caused or incurred in using transportation for the purpose ofthe seminar referred to in Article IV 3 (g); (c) recruitment for the seminar of thepersonnel referred to in Article IV 2, IV 3 (d) and ( e ) , and IV 4, and the Gov-ernment shall hold the United Nations and its personnel harmless in respect of anysuch actions, claims or other demands.

(rc) Agreement between the United Nations and Indonesia regarding thearrangements for the joint United Nations/Food and Agriculture Organi-zation Regional Seminar on remote sensing applications to be held atJakarta, Indonesia, from 9 to 28 November 1975.22 Signed at New Yorkon 4 November 1975

ARTICLE V


1. The Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the United Nationsshall be applicable in respect of the seminar. Accordingly, officials of the United


22

Nations performing functions in connexion with the seminar shall enjoy the privilegesand immunities provided under Articles V and VII of the said Convention.

2. Officials of the specialized agencies attending the seminar in pursuance ofparagraph (c) of Article II of this Agreement shall enjoy the privileges and immunitiesprovided under Articles VI and VII of the Convention on the Privileges and Immu-nities of the specialized agencies.

3. Participants attending the seminar in pursuance of Article II (a) of thisAgreement shall enjoy the privileges and immunities of experts on mission underArticle VI of the Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the United Nations.

4. Without prejudice to the provisions of the Convention on the Privilegesand Immunities of the United Nations, all participants and all persons performingfunctions in connexion with the seminar shall enjoy such privileges and immunities,facilities, and courtesies as are necessary for the independent exercise of theirfunctions in connexion with the seminar.

5. All persons enumerated in Article II of this Agreement and all personsperforming functions in connexion with the seminar who are riot nationals of Indonesiashall have the right of entry into and exit from Indonesia. They shall be grantedfacilities for speedy travel. Entry and exit visas, if required, shall be granted free ofcharge and without delay.

ARTICLE VI

Liability

The Government shall be responsible for dealing with any actions, claims orother demands arising out of (a) injury or damage to persons or property in thepremises referred to in Article IV 4 (a) and (6) above; (b) injury or damage topersons or property during use of the transportation referred to in Article IV 4 (h)and (/); (c) recruitment for the seminar of the personnel referred to in ArticleIV 4 (b), (d) and (/) and Article IV 5 and the Government shall hold the UnitedNations and its personnel harmless in respect of any such actions, claims or otherdemands.

(o) Letter agreement between the United Nations (United Nations Develop-ment Programme) and Fiji concerning the UNDP South Pacific RegionalOffice in Suva, Fiji.23 Signed at New York on 1 November 1975 andconfirmed on 1 December 1975

LETTER FROM THE ADMINISTRATOR OF THEUNITED NATIONS DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME

1 November 1975

On behalf of the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), I have thehonour to set forth in this letter arrangements for the appointment of a RegionalRepresentative of the UNDP in your country.

4. (a) The Regional Representative and the staff members of his office, beingofficials of the United Nations within the meaning of the Convention on the Privilegesand Immunities of the United Nations shall be entitled to the appropriate privileges,immunities and facilities under Article VIII of the Agreement dated 13 October 1970

23 Came into force on 1 December 1975.

23

between the Government and the UNDP24 concerning assistance to the Governmentfrom the then Special Fund of the United Nations.

(b) The Regional Representative and staff members of his office shall begranted such additional privileges and immunities as may be necessary for the effectiveexercise of their functions.

3. AGREEMENTS RELATING TO THE UNITED NATIONS CHILDREN'SFUND: REVISED MODEL AGREEMENT CONCERNING THE ACTIV-ITIES OF UNICEF25

ARTICLE VI

Claims against UNICEF

[See Juridical Yearbook, 1965, pp. 31 and 32]

ARTICLE VII


[See Juridical Yearbook, 1965, p. 32]

Revised agreement between the United Nations (United Nations Children'sFund) and Pakistan concerning the activities of UNICEF.26 Signed atIslamabad on 22 December 1975

This agreement contains articles similar to articles VI and VII of the revisedmodel agreement.

4. AGREEMENTS RELATING TO THE UNITED NATIONS DEVELOP-MENT PROGRAMME: STANDARD BASIC AGREEMENTS CONCERN-ING ASSISTANCE BY THE UNITED NATIONS DEVELOPMENT PRO-GRAMME27

ARTICLE III

Execution of projects

5. [See Juridical Yearbook, 1973, p. 24]

ARTICLE IX


[See Juridical Yearbook, 1973, p. 25]

24 See Juridical Yearbook, 1970, p. 34.26 UNICEF Field Manual, vol. II, Part IV-2, Appendix A (1 October 1964).26 Came into force on the date of signature.2T Document UNDP/ADM/LEG/34 of 6 March 1973. The standard basic agreement

prepared by the Bureau of Administration and Finance, in consultation with the ExecutingAgencies of UNDP represents a consolidation of the standard Special Fund, TechnicalAssistance, Operational Assistance and Office Agreements of the UNDP, which it is designedto replace.

24

(a) Agreements between the United Nations Development Programme andthe Governments of the Dominican Republic,28 the Bahamas,29 Bolivia,30

Guinea,31 Gambia,32 Cuba,33 Guinea-Bissau,34 E] Salvador35 and Bu-rundi36 concerning assistance from the United Nations Development Pro-gramme. Signed at Santo Domingo on 11 June 1974, at Nassau on 12July 1974, at La Paz on 31 October 1974, at New York on 13 February1975, at New York on 24 February 1975, at Havana on 17 May 1975,at Bissau on 23 June 1975, at San Salvador on 21 March 1975 and atBujumbua on 20 November 1975

These agreements contain provisions similar to articles III 5, IX, X and XIII 4of the standard basic agreement.

(&) (i) Agreement between the United Nations (United Nations Develop-ment Programme) and Botswana concerning assistance from theUnited Nations Development Programme.37 Signed at Gaborone on14 May 1975

This agreement contains provisions similar to articles III 5, IX, X and XIII, ofthe standard basic agreement.

(ii) Exchange of letters constituting an understanding between the UnitedNations (United Nations Development Programme) and Botswanawith respect to the provisions of the above-mentioned agreementconcerning United Nations Volunteers.38 Gaborone, 14 May and 28August 1975

I

Letter from the Resident Representative of theUnited Nations Development Programme in Botswana

14 May 1975

I have the honour to refer to the Agreement signed today by and between theGovernment of the Republic of Botswana and the United Nations DevelopmentProgramme (UNDP) concerning assistance to your Government by the UNDP.

In this connexion, I have the honour to place on record certain understandingsof the Parties with respect to the provisions of the Agreement concerning UnitedNations Volunteers.

The services of United Nations Volunteers will be provided to the Governmentof Botswana in accordance with resolution 2659 (XXV) of the United NationsGeneral Assembly and the Rules of Conduct and Conditions of Service adopted bythe UNDP Governing Council under the following conditions:

28 Came into force provisionally on 11 June 1974 and definitively on 8 May 1975.29 Came into force on 12 July 1974.30 Came into force on 31 October 1974.31 Came into force on 13 February 1975.32 Came into force on 24 February 1975.33 Came into force on 17 May 1975.34 Came into force provisionally on 23 June 1975.35 Came into force on 23 June 1975.36 Came into force on 20 November 1975.37 Came into force on the date of signature.38 Came into force on 28 August 1975.

25

(3) As persons performing services on behalf on UNDP, United NationsVolunteers will be covered by Articles IX, X and XIII of the Standard Basic AssistanceAgreement of even date between the Government of Botswana and UNDP. However,only the following limited privileges shall be requested for the United Nations Volun-teers:

(a) Entry and exit visa free of charge.(&) Import of used personal and household effects, excluding a motor vehicle,

within six months of their first arrival in Botswana, provided that save with thepermission of the Director of Customs and Excise such goods are not sold or disposedof to other persons within a period of two years after the date of importations intoBotswana.

(c) Immunity from legal process in respect of words spoken or written andof acts performed by them in their official capacity.

(d) Exemption from taxation on the salaries and emoluments paid to them bythe United Nations.

If the foregoing understandings are also those of your Government, I have thehonour to suggest that this letter and your reply in that sense should be regarded asconstituting an Agreement placing on record the understandings of the Parties in thematter.

nLetter from the Permanent Secretary, Ministry of

Finance and Development Planning

28 August 1975

I am directed to confirm that all the understandings as outlined in your letterincluding that of Tax Exemption are also those of the Botswana Government andthat therefore your letter and this reply be regarded as constituting an Agreementbetween the Government and the UNDP in respect of this subject.

5. STANDARD BASIC AGREEMENTS BETWEEN THE UNITED NA-TIONS (UNITED NATIONS DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME) ANDTHE INTERNATIONAL CIVIL AVIATION ORGANIZATION CON-CERNING UNDP TECHNICAL CO-OPERATION ACTIVITIES WITHGOVERNMENTS.39 SIGNED AT MONTREAL ON 21 NOVEMBER1975 AND AT NEW YORK ON 5 DECEMBER 1975

ARTICLE XIII

Waiver of immunities

In the event that the Executing Agency retains the services of operational expertsor consultant firms or organizations to assist it in the execution of a technical co-operation activity, the privileges and immunities to which any such operational expertor firm or organization and its personnel may be entitled under any agreement be-tween the UNDP and a Government may be waived by the Executing Agency where,in its opinion, the immunity would impede the course of justice and can be waivedwithout prejudice to the successful completion of the activity concerned or to the

39 Came into force on 5 December 1975.

26

interests of the UNDP or the Executing Agency; the Executing Agency shall waivesuch immunity in any case in which the UNDP so requests.

6. EXCHANGE OF LETTERS CONSTITUTING AN AGREEMENT BE-TWEEN THE UNITED NATIONS AND POLAND ON PRINCIPLESOF FINANCING THE PARTICIPATION OF THE POLISH CONTIN-GENT IN THE UNITED NATIONS EMERGENCY FORCE AND THEUNITED NATIONS DISENGAGEMENT OBSERVER FORCE IN THEMIDDLE EAST.40 NEW YORK, 23 OCTOBER 1975

I

LETTER FROM THE PERMANENT REPRESENTATIVE OF POLANDTO THE UNITED NATIONS

23 October 1975I have the honour to refer to the letter of 3 June 1975 of Mr. George F. Davidson,

Under-Secretary-General for Administration and Management, to the Acting PermanentRepresentative of Poland to the United Nations. In this letter mention is made ofthe possibility of exchanging letters between the Government of the Polish People'sRepublic and the Secretary-General of the United Nations concerning the financialaspects of the participation of the Polish contingent in the United Nations EmergencyForce and the United Nations Disengagement Observer Force in the Middle East.

The Government of the Polish People's Republic considers, pending conclusionof a comprehensive agreement between Poland and the United Nations pertaining toall aspects of Poland's participation in UNEF and UNDOF, that it is desirable toformulate in writing the principles governing the financing and allocation of expenseswith respect to the contingent provided by Poland for service in UNEF and UNDOF.These principles should be based upon relevant resolutions of the Security Counciland General Assembly, and in particular on resolution 3211 (XXIX) and the decisionof the General Assembly of 29 November 1974, which approved the budget of UNEF/UNDOF and established standardized rates of payment to troop-contributing countriesfor pay and allowances for their troops serving in UNEF arid/or UNDOF.

Taking into account the above mentioned decisions of the United Nations organsand also the Memoranda of Understanding based on discussions at the United NationsHeadquarters in New York between the Secretariat and the delegations of Polandand Canada, held from 6 to 21 November 1973, and those held between high-rankingofficials of the United Nations Secretariat and a group of Polish Government expertsfrom 22 January to 6 February 1974, the Government of the Polish People's Republicacts on the understanding that the United Nations accepts the obligation, subject torelevant decisions of the Security Council and General Assembly, to reimburse to thePolish Government out of funds for the purpose:

1. The amounts with respect to pay and allowances for its troops serving withUNEF/UNDOF at the rates provided for by the relevant decisions of theUnited Nations General Assembly;

2. The expenses incurred with respect to transportation, as authorized by theUnited Nations, for regular periodic and extraordinary rotations as well asthe repatriation of the Polish contingent upon completion of the missionwith its equipment, installations, vehicles and matériel;

40 Came into force on 23 October 1975.

27

3. The costs of usage and/or depreciation, at appropriate rates, of equipment,installations, vehicles and matériel, both new and used, provided by thePolish authorities at the United Nations request. Such rates shall be basedon depreciation criteria which shall be decided upon in direct negotiationsbetween representatives of the Polish Government and the United NationsSecretariat;

4. Benefits, indemnities, and other related expenses paid by the Polish Gov-ernment, based upon its national legislation and/or regulations for death,injury, disability or illness attributable to service with UNEF/UNDOF, fromthe contingent's departure to its return to Poland upon completion of itsmission, and in cases of illness including the period necessary for suchillness to be exposed;

5. Other properly substantiated extraordinary costs (exclusive of those includedin the above) for which reimbursement is agreed, incurred by the Polishauthorities in connexion with Poland's participation in UNEF/UNDOF andresulting from the performance of functions entrusted to the Polish contingent.

Mutually recognized claims of the United Nations arising from the participationof the Polish contingent will be settled by offsetting against amounts otherwise owedby United Nations to the Polish Government or by another agreed method of set-tlement.

I propose that this letter and your reply should constitute the Agreement onprinciples of financing the participation of the Polish contingent in the UnitedNations Emergency Force and the United Nations Disengagement Observer Force inthe Middle East.

Accept, Sir, the assurances of my highest consideration.

II

LETTER FROM THE SECRETARY-GENERAL

23 October 1975

I have the honour to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of today's dateconcerning the principles governing the financing of the participation of the Polishcontingent in the United Nations Emergency Force and the United Nations Disen-gagement Observer Force in the Middle East, which reads as follows:

[See letter I above]

I wish to confirm that the proposals contained in your letter are satisfactory andacceptable to the United Nations and that your letter and this reply shall constitutethe Agreement between the United Nations and the Polish Government on principlesof financing the participation of the Polish contingent in the United Nations EmergencyForce and the United Nations Disengagement Observer Force in the Middle East.

Accept, Sir, the assurances of my highest consideration.

28

B. Treaty provisions concerning the legal status of intergovernmentalorganizations related to the United Nations

1. CONVENTION ON THE PRIVILEGES AND IMMUNITIES OF THESPECIALIZED AGENCIES.41 APPROVED BY THE GENERAL ASSEM-BLY OF THE UNITED NATIONS ON 21 NOVEMBER 1947

In 1975, the following States acceded to the Convention or, if already parties,undertook by a subsequent notification to appiy the provisions of the Convention, inrespect of the specialized agencies indicated below:42

Date of receipt ofinstrument of accession Specialized

State or ratification agencies

Togo Notification 16 September 1975 UPU

Zambia Notification of 16 June 1975 ILO, PAO, ICAO, UNESCO,succession WHO (second revised text

of annex VII), UPU, ITU,WMO, IMCO (revised textof annex XII )43

As of 31 December 1975, 82 States were parties to the Convention.44

2. INTERNATIONAL LABOUR ORGANISATION

(a) Agreement between the ILO and Zaire concerning the establishment ofan ILO Office in Kinshasa.45 Signed at Kinshasa on 1 April 1975

This agreement contains an article similar to article 2 of an agreement betweenthe ILO and Trinidad and Tobago reproduced on page 29 of the Juridical Yearbook,1969. The other relevant provisions of the agreement read as follows:

ARTICLE 4

1. The Executive Council shall facilitate the entry into, professional activity,travel and sojourn in, and departure from Zaire, of personnel assigned to the KinshasaOffice of the International Labour Organisation and of persons required to go thereon official business.

2. The Executive Council shall accept and recognize as a valid travel documentthe United Nations laissez-passer issued by the International Labour Organisationto its personnel and to experts going to Zaire on official business.

3. The spouses and minor children of the personnel of the Kinshasa Officeshall enjoy the privileges and immunities provided for in article 2, paragraph 1, andin paragraphs 1 and 2 the present article.

41 United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 33, p. 261.42 Ths Convention is in force with regard to each State which deposited an instrument

of accession and in respect of specialized agencies indicated therein or in a subsequentnotification as from the date of deposit of such instrument or receipt of such notification.

43See Juridical Yearbook, 1968, p. 66.44 For the list of those States, see Multilateral Treaties in respect of which the Secretary-

General performs Depositary Functions (ST/LEG/SER.D/9; United Nations publication,Sales No. E.76.V.7), p. 40.


29

ARTICLE 5

The Office of the International Labour Organisation and its personnel shallco-operate at all times with the competent Zairian authorities in order to preservejustice, to observe the regulations in force and to avoid any abuse of the privilegesand immunities included in this agreement.

(b) Agreement between the ILO and Fiji concerning the establishment of anILO Office in Suva.46 Signed at Suva on 8 April 1975

This agreement contains provisions similar to article 2 and 3 of the agreementbetween the ILO and Trinidad and Tobago referred to under (a) above.

(c) Agreement between the ILO and Madagascar concerning the establishmentof an ILO Office in Tananarive.47 Signed at Tananarive on 14 April 1975

This agreement contains provisions similar to articles 2, 3 and 5 of an agreementbetween the ILO and Lebanon, reproduced on page 53 of the Juridical Yearbook,1966.

3. FOOD AND AGRICULTURE ORGANIZATION OF THEUNITED NATIONS

(û) Agreements based on the standard "Memorandum of Responsibilities" inrespect of FAO sessions

Agreements concerning specific sessions held outside FAO headquarters andcontaining provisions on privileges and immunities of FAO and participants similarto the standard text (published in the Juridical Yearbook, 1972, p. 32) were concludedin 1975 with the Governments of the following countries acting as hosts to suchsessions :

Australia, Austria, Brazil, Bulgaria, Canada, Costa Rica, Cuba, Czechoslovakia,Ecuador, Egypt, Finland, France,48 Ghana, Greece, Iraq, Israel, Italy,48 IvoryCoast, Japan,48 Kenya, Kuwait, Malaysia, Monaco,48 Nicaragua, Norway, Pakistan,Panama, Philippines, Portugal, Romania, Sweden,48 Thailand, Trinidad andTobago, Tunisia, United Kingdom,48 United States of America,48 Yugoslavia.

(b) Agreements based on the standard "Memorandum of Responsibilities" inrespect of group seminars, training courses, study tours or workshops

Agreements concerning specific group seminars, training courses, study tours orworkshops, and containing provisions on privileges and immunities of FAO andparticipants similar to the standard text (published in the Juridical Yearbook, 1972,p. 33), were concluded in 1975 with the Governments of the following countriesacting as hosts to such group seminars, training courses, study tours or workshops:

Algeria, Ecuador, Egypt, Ghana, Hungary, Italy,48 Kenya, Malaysia, Morocco,Niger, Nigeria, Pakistan, Peru, Philippines, Sri Lanka, Surinam, Thailand, Tunisia,United Kingdom, Upper Volta, Venezuela, Western Samoa.

46 Came into force on the date of signature.47 Came into force on the date of signature.48 Certain exceptions to or amendments of the standard text were introduced at the

request of the host Government.

30

4. UNITED NATIONS EDUCATIONAL, SCIENTIFICAND CULTURAL ORGANIZATION

Agreements relating to conferences, seminars and other meetingsO) Agreement between the Federal Military Government of Nigeria and the

United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization con-cerning the Conference of Ministers of Education of African MemberStates. Signed at Paris on 9 July 1975 and at Lagos on 22 July 1975

III. Privileges and immunities

The Government of Nigeria will apply in respect of the Conference the provisionsof the Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the; Specialized Agencies andannex IV thereto relating to UNESCO, to which it has been a party since 26 June1961. In particular, it will ensure that no restriction is placed upon the right of entryinto and sojourn in as well as departure from its territory of any person entitled toattend the Conference in an official capacity, without distinction of nationality.(b) Agreements containing a provision similar to that referred to in paragraph

(a) above were also concluded between UNESCO and the Governmentsof Algeria, Austria, Bulgaria, the Central African Republic, Colombia,Congo, Ecuador, Egypt, Finland, Ghana, India, Kuwait, Malaysia, Mexico,Morocco, Nepal, Pakistan, the Philippines, Poland, Tunisia, the Union ofSoviet Socialist Republics, Upper Volta, Yugoslavia and Zaire, concerningmeetings held in their respective territories.

5. WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION

Basic Agreements between WHO and the Governments of Botswana and Surinamfor the provision of technical advisory assistance.19 Signed respectively atBrazzaville on 25 March and Gaborone on 17 June 1975 and at Paramariboon 25 November 1975These agreements contain provisions similar to article I, paragraph 6, and article V

of the Agreement between the World Health Organization and Guyana reproducedon page 56 of the Juridical Yearbook, 1968.

6. INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY

(1) Agreement on the Privileges and Immunities of the International AtomicEnergy Agency.50 Approved by the Board of Governors of the Agencyon 1 July 1959

(a) Deposit of instrument of acceptance

The following Member State accepted the Agreement on the Privileges and Immu-nities of the International Atomic Energy Agency in 1975, on the date indicated:51

Mauritius 7 April 1975

49 Came into force respectively on 17 June 1975 and 25 November 1975.so United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 374, p. 147.51 The Agreement enters into force as between the Agency and the accepting State on

the date of deposit of the instrument of acceptance.

31

The Agreement was accepted without reservation.

This brought up to 45 the number of States parties to this Agreement.

(b) Incorporation of provisions of the Agreement on the Privileges and Im-munities of the International Atomic Energy Agency by reference in otheragreements

(i) Article 10 of the Agreement of 23 August 1973 between the Governmentof the Republic of Ghana and the International Atomic Energy Agencyfor the Application of Safeguards in connexion with the Treaty on theNon-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons; entered into force on 17 February1975 (INFCIRC/226).

(ii) Article 10 of the Agreement of 30 January 1973 between the Governmentof the Kingdom of Morocco and the International Atomic EnergyAgency for the Application of Safeguards in connexion with the Treatyon the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons; entered into force on 18February 1975 (INFCIRC/228).

(iii) Article 11 of the Agreement between the International Atomic EnergyAgency, the Government of the Principality of Monaco and the Océano-graphie Institute at Monaco concerning developmental studies on theeffects of radio-activity in the sea; entered into force on 25 February1975 (INFCIRC/129/Rev.l).

(iv) Article 10 of the Agreement of 2 October 1974 between the Republicof Ecuador and the International Atomic Energy Agency for the Applica-tion of Safeguards in connexion with the Treaty for the Prohibition ofNuclear Weapons in Latin America and the Treaty on the Non-Prolif-eration of Nuclear Weapons; entered into force on 10 March 1975(INFCIRC/231).

(v) Part V, Section 25 of the Agreement between the International AtomicEnergy Agency, the Government of Israel and the Government of theUnited States of America for the Application of Safeguards; enteredinto force on 4 April 1975.

(vi) Article 10 of the Agreement between the Government of the Kingdomof Sweden and the International Atomic Energy Agency for the Applica-tion of Safeguards in connexion with the Treaty on the Non-Proliferationof Nuclear Weapons; entered into force on 14 April 1975 (INFCIRC/234).

(vii) Article 10 of the Agreement between the Republic of Honduras and theInternational Atomic Energy Agency for the Application of Safeguardsin connexion with the Treaty for the Prohibition of Nuclear Weaponsin Latin America and the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of NuclearWeapons; entered into force on 18 April 1975 (INFCIRC/235).

(viii) Article 10 of the Agreement between the Republic of El Salvador andthe International Atomic Energy Agency for the Application of Safe-guards in connexion with the Treaty for the Prohibition of NuclearWeapons in Latin America and the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation ofNuclear Weapons; entered into force on 22 April 1975 (INFCIRC/232).

•

(ix) Article 10 of the Agreement of 5 April 1973 between the Kingdom ofthe Netherlands and the International Atomic Energy Agency for the

32

Application of Safeguards with respect to the Netherlands Antilles inconnexion with the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weaponsand Additional Protocol I to the Treaty for the Prohibition of NuclearWeapons in Latin America; entered into force on 5 June 1975 (INFCIRC/229).

(x) Article 10 of the Agreement of 5 April 1973 between the Kingdom ofthe Netherlands and the International Atomic Energy Agency for theApplication of Safeguards with respect to Surinam in connexion withthe Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons and AdditionalProtocol I to the Treaty for the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons inLatin America; entered into force on 5 June 1975 (INFCIRC/230).

(xi) Section 17 of the Agreement between the International Atomic EnergyAgency and the Government of Spain for the Application of Safeguards;entered into force on 18 June 1975 (INFCIRC/221).

(xii) Article 10 of the Agreement of 28 July 1975 between the Kingdom ofSwaziland and the International Atomic Energy- Agency for the Applica-tion of Safeguards in connexion with the Treaty on the Non-Proliferationof Nuclear Weapons; entered into force on 28 July 1975 (INFCIRC/227).

(xiii) Section 21 of the Agreement of 22 September 1975 between the Interna-tional Atomic Energy Agency, the Government of the Republic of Koreaand the Government of the French Republic for the Application ofSafeguards; entered into force on 22 September 1975 (INFCIRC/233).

(xiv) Article VI, Section 8 of the Agreement between the International AtomicEnergy Agency and the Government of Venezuela for assistance by theAgency to Venezuela in continuing a reactor project; entered into forceon 7 November 1975 (INFCIRC/238).

(xv) Article 10 of the Agreement between the Government of the Republicof Korea and the International Atomic Energy Agency for the Applicationof Safeguards in connexion with the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation ofNuclear Weapons; entered into force on 14 November 1975 (INFCIRC/236).

(2) Provisions affecting the Privileges and Immunities of the InternationalAtomic Energy Agency in Austria

Supplemental Agreement in the form of an Exchange of Letters concerningTurn-Over Taxes; entered into force on 1 February 1975 (INFCIRC/15/Rev. 1,part VI).

33

Part Two

LEGAL ACTIVITIES OF THE UNITED NATIONSAND RELATED INTERGOVERNMENTAL

ORGANIZATIONS

Chapter III

GENERAL REVIEW OF THE LEGAL ACTIVITIES OF THE UNITEDNATIONS AND RELATED INTERGOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS

A. General review of the legal activities of the United Nations

I. DISARMAMENT AND RELATED MATTERS

1. MEETINGS OF THE CONFERENCE OF THE COMMITTEE ON DISARMAMENT

During its two series of meetings in 1975, the Conference of the Committee onDisarmament1 continued discussion on several recurrent items, particularly those con-nected with the prohibition of chemical weapons and the cessation of nuclear weapontests. Measures relating to the non-proliferation of nuclear weapons and to the earlycessation of the nuclear arms race were also considered, particularly in connexionwith the Review Conference of the Parties to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferationof Nuclear Weapons. The Conference concentrated its attention, however, on thefollowing three new subjects on the agenda: the arms control implications of peacefulnuclear explosions within the framework of a comprehensive test ban, the questionof nuclear-weapon-free zones and the prohibition of environmental modification forhostile purposes. Between 14 and 18 July 1975, informal meetings were held, withthe participation of 11 experts, to discuss the question of peaceful nuclear explosions.

Pursuant to resolution 326IF (XXIX) of 9 December 1974, the Conference ofthe Committee on Disarmament invited 21 States to appoint experts to participatein an Ad Hoc Group to carry out a comprehensive study of the question of nuclear-weapon-free zones in all its aspects. The Ad Hoc Group of Qualified GovermentExperts for the Study of the Question of Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zones held two roundsof meetings in 1975 and submitted a report (CCD/467)2 to the Conference.

Pursuant to General Assembly resolution 3264 (XXIX) of 9 December 1974, theConference of the Committee on Disarmament discussed the question of the prohibi-tion of action to influence the environment and climate for military and other hostilepurposes, which are incompatible with the maintenance of international security, humanwell-being and health. Informal meetings were held on the; subject between 4 and 8August 1975. On 21 August, the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics and the UnitedStates of America submitted identical draft texts of a convention on this question tothe Conference (CCD/471, CCD/472).^

All aspects of the work of the Conference of the Committee on Disarmamentin 1975 were covered in its report to the General Assembly (A/10027-DC/238).4

1 For the membership of the Conference, see General Assembly resolution 3261 (XXIX).2 For the printed text, see Official Records of the General Assembly, Thirtieth Session,

Supplement No. 27 A (A/10027/Add.l), annex I. For the action taken by the GeneralAssembly at its thirtieth session on this question, see subsection 8 of the present section below.

*Ibid., Supplement No. 27 (A/10027), annex II. For the action taken by the GeneralAssembly at its thirtieth session on this question, see subsection 10 of the present sectionbelow.

*Ibid., Supplement No. 27 (A/10027).

37

2. WORLD DISARMAMENT CONFERENCE

The Ad Hoc Committee on the World Disarmament Conference5 held 12 meetingsbetween 1 April and 27 August 1975 and submitted a report to the General Assembly6

in accordance with resolution 3260 (XXIX) of 9 December 1974. The report containeda summary of the views of States on the objectives of a world disarmament conference,their comments regarding other aspects of such a conference, and the Committee'sconclusions. It also contained a recommendation regarding the Ad Hoc Committee'sfuture work under an appropriate mandate.

The General Assembly, by resolution 3469 (XXX) of 11 December 1975, reaf-firmed resolution 3260 (XXIX) in its entirety and renewed the mandate of the Ad HocCommittee on the World Disarmament Conference.

3. ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL CONSEQUENCES OF THE ARMAMENTS RACE AND ITSEXTREMELY HARMFUL EFFECTS ON WORLD PEACE AND SECURITY

This item was included in the agenda of the thirtieth session of the GeneralAssembly in accordance with resolution 3075 (XXVIII) of 6 December 1973 by whichthe Assembly had requested the Secretary-General to pursue the study of the conse-quences of the arms race to enable him to submit, on request, an up-to-date reporton the matter.7 The original report of the Secretary-General (A/8649 and Add.l) wassubmitted to the Assembly in 1971 and issued as a publication in 1972.8

By resolution 3462 (XXX) of 11 December 1975, the General Assembly, afterrecalling its earlier resolutions on the matter and expressing its concern that, despiterepeated requests for its cessation, the arms race, particularly of nuclear armaments,had continued to increase alarmingly, inter alia called upon all States and organsconcerned with disarmament issues to preoccupy themselves with the adoption ofeffective measures for the cessation of the arms race, especially hi the nuclear field,and for the reduction of military budgets, and to make sustained efforts towardsgeneral and complete disarmament.

4. NAPALM AND OTHER INCENDIARY WEAPONS AND ALL ASPECTS OF THEIR POSSIBLE USE

In considering this item, the General Assembly had before it two reports of theSecretary-General (A/10222, A/10223 and Add.l)9 submitted pursuant to resolutions3255 A and B (XXIX), respectively, of 9 December 1974. The first report gave anaccount of the work of the Diplomatic Conference on the Reaffirmation and Devel-opment of International Humanitarian Law Applicable in Armed Conflicts and, moreparticularly, its consideration of the question of the use of napalm and other incendiaryweapons, as well as other specific conventional weapons which might be deemed tocause unnecessary suffering or to have indiscriminate effects, and its efforts foragreement on rules prohibiting or restricting the use of such weapons. The secondreport contained the substantive replies of 17 Governments and of the InternationalCommittee of the Red Cross and WHO to the Secretary-General's request for infor-

5 For the membership of the Ad Hoc Committee, see General Assembly resolution 3183(XXVIII).

6 Official Records of the General Assembly, Thirtieth Session, Supplement No. 28 (A/10028 and Corr.l). For other relevant documents, see ibid., Thirtieth Session, Annexes,agenda item 40.

7 For relevant documents, see ibid., Thirtieth Session, Annexes, agenda item 31.8 Economic and Social Consequences of the Arms Race and of Military Expenditures

(United Nations publication, Sales No.: E.72.IX.16).9 For other relevant documents, see Official Records of the General Assembly, Thirtieth

Session, Annexes, agenda item 35.

38

mation on the question of the use of napalm and other incendiary weapons in armedconflicts.

By resolution 3464 (XXX) of 11 December 1975, the General Assembly interalia invited the Diplomatic Conference to continue its consideration of the use ofspecific conventional weapons and its search for agreement on possible rules prohib-iting or restricting the use of such weapons and decided to include in the provisionalagenda of its thirty-first session an item entitled "Incendiary and other specific con-ventional weapons which may be the subject of prohibitions or restrictions of use forhumanitarian reasons".

5. CHEMICAL AND BACTERIOLOGICAL (BIOLOGICAL) WEAPONS

In considering this item, the General Assembly had before it the report of theConference of the Committee on Disarmament (A10027-DC/238).10- n

By resolution 3465 (XXX) of 11 December 1975, the General Assembly reaf-firmed the objective of reaching early agreement on the effective prohibition of thedevelopment, production and stockpiling of all chemical weapons and on their elim-ination from the arsenals of all States; urged all States to make every effort to facilitatesuch agreement; requested the Conference of the Committee on Disarmament tocontinue negotiations as a matter of high priority, taking account of the existingproposals, with a view to reaching early agreement on the question; invited all Statesthat had not already done so to accede to the Convention on the Prohibition of theDevelopment, Production and Stockpiling of Bacteriological (Biological) and ToxinWeapons and on Their Destruction;12 invited all States that had not already done soto accede to or ratify the Protocol for the Prohibition of the Use in War of Asphyx-iating, Poisonous or Other Gases, and of Bacteriological Methods of Warfare, signedat Geneva on 17 June 1925,13 and called again for strict observance by all States ofthe principles and objectives contained therein.

6. URGENT NEED FOR CESSATION OF NUCLEAR AND THERMONUCLEAR TESTS ANDCONCLUSION OF A TREATY DESIGNED TO ACHIEVE A COMPREHENSIVE TEST BAN

In considering this item, the General Assembly had before it the report of theConference of the Committee on Disarmament (A/10027-DC/238),14 a letter dated22 September 1975 from Mexico (A/C.1/1055), and a letter dated 27 October fromSweden (A/C.1/1067).

By resolution 3466 (XXX) of 11 December 1975, the General Assembly noted:that the Final Declaration of the Review Conference of the Parties to the Treaty onthe Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons,15 adopted by consensus on 30 May 1975(see A/C.1/1068, annex I), had expressed the view that a comprehensive test bantreaty was one of the most important measures to halt the nuclear arms race, hadexpressed the hope that the nuclear-weapon States parties to the Treaty would takethe lead in reaching an early solution on the issue, and had appealed to those Statesto make every effort to reach agreement on the conclusion of an effective compre-hensive test ban; that the final documentation of the Conference had included adraft resolution and a draft additional protocol to the Treaty, whereby the nuclear-

10 For the printed text, see ibid., Thirtieth Session, Supplement No. 27 (A/10027).11 For other relevant documents, see ibid., Thirtieth Session. Annexes, agenda item 36.12 Resolution 2826 (XXVI), Annex. Also reproduced in the Juridical Yearbook, 1971,

p. 118.13 League of Nations, Treaty Series, vol. XCIV, p. 65.14 See foot-note 10 above.15 Reproduced in the Juridical Yearbook, 1968, p. 156.

39

weapon States depositaries of the Treaty would agree on a moratorium on tests whichcould in due course become a comprehensive test ban embracing all nuclear-weaponStates; and that the desire had been expressed by a considerable number of delegationsat the Conference that the nuclear-weapon States parties to the Treaty should, assoon as possible, enter into an agreement to halt all their nuclear weapon tests for aspecific time, whereupon the terms of such an agreement would be reviewed in thelight of the opportunity at that time to achieve a universal and permanent cessationof all nuclear weapon tests. Furthermore, the Assembly condemned all nuclear weapontests; deplored the continued lack of progress towards a comprehensive test ban agree-ment; emphasized the urgency of reaching such an agreement; called upon all nuclear-weapon States to halt all nuclear weapon tests through an agreed suspension, subjectto review after a specified period, as an interim step towards the conclusion of aformal comprehensive test ban agreement; emphasized the particular responsibilityof the nuclear-weapon States parties to international agreements in which they haddeclared their intention to achieve the earliest possible cessation of the nuclear armsrace; called upon States not parties to the Treaty Banning Nuclear Weapon Tests inthe Atmosphere, in Outer Space and under Water to adhere to it forthwith; and urgedthe Conference of the Committee on Disarmament to give the matter the highestpriority and to report to the Assembly at its thirty-first session on the progress achieved.

7. IMPLEMENTATION OF GENERAL ASSEMBLY RESOLUTION 3258 (XXIX) CONCERNINGTHE SIGNATURE AND RATIFICATION OF ADDITIONAL PROTOCOL II OF THE TREATYFOR THE PROHIBITION OF NUCLEAR WEAPONS IN LATIN AMERICA (TREATY OFTLATELOLCO)16

By resolution 3467 (XXX) of 11 December 1975," the General Assembly,recalling with satisfaction that the United Kingdom of Great Britain and NorthernIreland, the United States of America, France and China were already parties toAdditional Protocol II of the Treaty for the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons in LatinAmerica (Treaty of Tlatelolco), again urged the Union of Soviet Socialist Republicsto sign and ratify Additional Protocol II.

8. COMPREHENSIVE STUDY OF THE QUESTION OF NUCLEAR-WEAPON-FREE ZONESIN ALL ITS ASPECTS

In considering this item, the General Assembly had before it the special reportof the Conference of the Committee on Disarmament containing the comprehensivestudy (CCD/467),18 prepared by the Ad Hoc Group of Qualified GovernmentalExperts for the Study of the Question of Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zones under theauspices of the Conference, pursuant to Assembly resolution 3261 F (XXIX). TheGroup of Experts, in the study, stated that, in fulfilling its tasks, it had attempted toelaborate the concept of nuclear-weapon-free zones, to identify the principal issuesinvolved in such zones and to analyse their implications both for zonal and extrazonalStates. The Group further stated that the study did not attempt to establish any preciserules; it only indicated certain guidelines that could be used concerning the establish-ment of such zones.

By resolution 3472 A (XXX) of 11 December 1975, the General Assemblyinter alia took note of the special report of the Conference of the Committee onDisarmament. By resolution 3472 B (XXX) of the same date the General Assembly

16 Reproduced in the Juridical Yearbook, 1967, p. 284.17 For relevant documents, see Official Records of the General Assembly, Thirtieth

Session, Annexes, agenda item 38.18 See foot-note 2 above.

40

solemnly adopted a declaration defining the concept of a nuclear-weapon-free zoneas any zone, recognized as such by the Assembly, which any group of States hasfreely established by virtue of a treaty or convention whereby the statute of totalabsence of nuclear weapons to which the zone shall be subject, including the procedurefor the delimitation of the zone, is defined and whereby an international system ofverification and control is established to guarantee compliance with the obligationsderiving from that statute. It also defined the principal obligations of the nuclear-weapon States towards nuclear-weapon-free zones and towards the States includedtherein, to be undertaken or reaffirmed in a legally binding international instrument,as the following: to respect in all its parts the statute of total absence of nuclearweapons defined in the treaty or convention which serves as the constitutive instrumentof the zone; to refrain from contributing in any way to the performance in theterritories forming part of the zone of acts which involve a violation of the aforesaidtreaty or convention; and to refrain from using or threatening to use nuclear weaponsagainst the States included in the zone. Finally it noted that the scope of the abovedefinitions would in no way impair the resolutions which the Assembly had adoptedor might adopt with regard to specific cases of nuclear-weapon-free zones nor therights emanating for the Member States from such resolutions.19

9. IMPLEMENTATION OF GENERAL ASSEMBLY RESOLUTION 3262 (XXIX) CON-CERNING THE SIGNATURE AND RATIFICATION OF ADDITIONAL PROTOCOL I OF THETREATY FOR THE PROHIBITION OF NUCLEAR WEAPONS IN LATIN AMERICA (TREATYOF TLATELOLCO) 20

In considering this item, the General Assembly had before it a report (A/10266)21 submitted under resolution 3262 (XXIX) of 9 December 1974 in whichthe Secretary-General noted that he had received no replies from France or theUnited States of America concerning any measure adopted by them with regard toparagraph 2 of that resolution urging them to become parties to Additional Protocol Iof the Treaty for the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons in Latin America (Treaty ofTlatelolco).

By resolution 3473 (XXX) of 11 December 1975, the General Assembly,recalling with satisfaction that the United Kingdom of Great Britain and NorthernIreland and the Netherlands were already parties to Additional Protocol I of theTreaty, again urged France and the United States of America to sign and ratify theProtocol as soon as possible.

10. PROHIBITION OF ACTION TO INFLUENCE THE ENVIRONMENT AND CLIMATE FORMILITARY AND OTHER HOSTILE PURPOSES, WHICH ARE INCOMPATIBLE WITH THEMAINTENANCE OF INTERNATIONAL SECURITY, HUMAN WELL-BEING AND HEALTH

In considering this item, the General Assembly had before it the report of theConference of the Committee on Disarmament (A/10027-DC/238).22'23

19 In connexion with the question of nuclear-weapon-free zones, mention may also bemade of General Assembly resolutions 3471 (XXX), 3474 (XXX), 3476 A and B (XXX)and 3477 (XXX) of 11 December 1975, entitled respectively "Implementation of the Declara-tion on the Denuclearization of Africa", "Establishment of a nuclear-weapon-free zone inthe region of the Middle East", "Declaration and establishment of a nuclear-weapon-freezone in South Asia" and "Establishment of a nuclear-weapon-free zone in the South Pacific".

20 Reproduced in the Juridical Yearbook, 1967, p. 283.21 For other relevant documents, see Official Records of the General Assembly, Thirtieth

Session, Annexes, agenda item 45.22 See foot-note 10 above.23 For other relevant documents, see Official Records of the General Assembly, Thirtieth


41

By resolution 3475 (XXX) of 11 December 1975, the General Assembly, notingwith satisfaction that the delegations of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics andthe United States of America had submitted to the Conference of the Committee onDisarmament identical drafts of a convention on the prohibition of military or anyother hostile use of environmental modification techniques and that other delegationshad offered suggestions and preliminary observations regarding those drafts, inter aliarequested the Conference to continue negotiations, bearing in mind existing proposalsand relevant discussion, with a view to reaching early agreement, if possible duringthe 1976 session of the Conference, on the text of a convention on the prohibition ofmilitary or other hostile use of environmental modification techniques and to submita special report on the results achieved for consideration by the Assembly at itsthirty-first session.

11. CONCLUSION OF A TREATY ON THE COMPLETE AND GENERAL PROHIBITIONOF NUCLEAR WEAPON TESTS

This item was included in the agenda of the thirtieth session of the GeneralAssembly at the request of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (A/10241).24

In the request, the USSR drew attention to the need to consolidate the process ofpolitical détente by taking measures in the military field aimed at halting the armsrace and working towards disarmament. Stressing the great significance of theprohibition of nuclear weapon tests in the elimination of the danger of nuclear warand towards halting the nuclear arms race, the USSR believed that it was of theutmost importance to take measures at the international level on the complete andgeneral prohibition of nuclear weapon tests and underlined the necessity to concludean appropriate international treaty with wide participation providing for the completeprohibition of nuclear weapon tests in all environments by all States. A draft treatyon the subject was annexed to the request.

By resolution 3478 (XXX) of 11 December 1975, the General Assembly,recognizing the urgent need for the cessation everywhere and by all of nuclearweapon tests, including underground tests, inter alia took note of the draft treaty onthe complete and general prohibition of nuclear weapon tests submitted by the Unionof Soviet Socialist Republics; and called upon all nuclear-weapon States to enterinto negotiations, not later than 31 March 1976, with a view to reaching agreementon the subject and invited 25 to 30 non-nuclear-weapon States, to be appointed bythe President of the General Assembly after consultations with all regional groups,to participate in those negotiations and to inform the Assembly, at its thirty-firstsession, of the results of the negotiations.

12. PROHIBITION OF THE DEVELOPMENT AND MANUFACTURE OF NEW TYPESOF WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION AND NEW SYSTEMS OF SUCH WEAPONS

This item was included in the agenda of the thirtieth session of the GeneralAssembly at the request of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (A/10243).25

In the request, the USSR stressed that the positive changes in the internationalsituation facilitated the further development of the process of détente. It noted that,despite the various international agreements concluded and the negotiations currentlyunder way in the field of disarmament, the arms race was continuing and the dangerthat science and technology would be used to create new types of weapons of massdestruction was becoming increasingly real. To prevent science and technology frombeing used for such military purposes, it would be necessary to work out an appro-

24 For the request and other relevant documents, see ibid., Thirtieth Session, Annexes,agenda item 122.

25 Ibid., agenda item 126.

42

priate international agreement banning the development of new types of weaponsof mass destruction and of new systems of such weapons. Such an agreement shouldnot create obstacles to the economic, scientific and tecnological progress of the Statesparties. The USSR further stated that the adoption by the Assembly of a decisionfavouring the idea of concluding such an international agreement would constitute amajor contribution to the limitation of the arms race. A draft: agreement was annexedto the request.

By resolution 3479 (XXX) of 11 December 1975, the General Assembly interalia considered it necessary to take effective steps, by concluding an appropriateinternational treaty or agreement, for the prohibition of the development and manu-facture of new types of weapons of mass destruction and new systems of suchweapons; took note of the draft agreement on the subject submitted by the Union ofSoviet Socialist Republics as well as points of view and suggestions put forwardduring the discussion of that question; and requested the Conference of the Com-mittee on Disarmament to proceed, with the assistance of qualified governmentalexperts, to work out the text of such an agreement and to submit to the Assembly,at its thirty-first session, a report on the results achieved.

13. GENERAL AND COMPLETE DISARMAMENT

In considering this item, the General Assembly had before it, in addition to thereport of the Conference of the Committee on Disarmament (A/10027-DC/238),26- 27

three documents concerning the peaceful application of nuclear explosions, namely,a note by the Secretary-General transmitting the nineteenth report of IAEA (A/10168 and Corr.l and Add.l); a note by the Secretary-General (A/10215) transmit-ting the text of a letter dated 18 August 1975 addressed to him by the Secretary-General of the Review Conference of the Parties to the Treaty on the Non-Prolifera-tion of Nuclear Weapons, pursuant to paragraph 4 of Assembly resolution 3261 (D)(XXIX) of 9 December 1974; and a note by the Secretary-General dated 27 October1975 (A/10316).

By resolution 3484 (XXX) of 12 December 1975, the General Assembly,recalling its resolutions 3261 D (XXIX) of 9 December 1974 and 3386 (XXX) of 12November 1975, appealed once again to all States, in particular nuclear-weaponStates, to exert concerted efforts in all appropriate international forums with a viewto working out effective measures for the cessation of the nuclear arms race and theprevention of the further proliferation of nuclear weapons; and noted with apprecia-tion (a) the report of IAEA concerning its studies of the peaceful applications ofnuclear explosions, including information on the establishment of the Ad Hoc AdvisoryGroup on Nuclear Explosions for Peaceful Purposes, (b) paragraphs 62 to 78 ofthe report of the Conference of the Committee on Disarmament concerning the armscontrol implications of peaceful nuclear explosions within the framework of acomprehensive test ban, (c) the consideration by the Review Conference of the Partiesto the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons of the role of nuclearexplosions for peaceful purposes as provided for in that Treaty (see A/10215, annex),and (d) the observations of the Secretary-General in the introduction to his annualreport submitted to the Assembly at its thirtieth session. The Assembly also notedthe conclusions of the Review Conference concerning article V of the Treaty,contained in the Final Declaration of the Conference (see A/C.1/1068, annex I);noted that the final documentation of the Review Conference included a draftresolution (see A/10215, annex, para. 4) urging the depositary Governments of the

26 See foot-note 10 above.27 For other relevant documents, see Official Records of the General Assembly, Thirtieth

Session, agenda item 41.

43

Treaty to initiate consultations with all other States parties to the Treaty to seekagreement concerning a meeting of those parties to conclude the special basic interna-tional agreement contemplated in article V of the Treaty; noted that, according toinformation provided by the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics and the United Statesof America to the Review Conference under resolution 3261 D (XXIX), no consul-tations had taken place concerning the international agreement envisaged in article Vof the Treaty; and invited the USSR and the United States to provide to the Assembly,at its thirty-first session, information on such consultations as they might have enteredinto or might intend to enter into for the conclusion of the international agreementenvisaged in article V of the Treaty. Furthermore, the Assembly requested IAEA tocontinue its examination of the peaceful application of nuclear explosions, authorizedby the Board of Governors of the Agency under its resolution of 11 June 1975 (A/10168/Add.l), and to report on its progress to the Assembly at its thirty-first session;requested the Conference of the Committee on Disarmament to keep under review,in its consideration of a comprehensive test ban treaty, the arms control implicationsof nuclear explosions for peaceful purposes, including the possibility of the misuseof such explosions to circumvent any ban on the testing of nuclear weapons; stressedthe need to ensure that any testing or application of nuclear explosions for peacefulpurposes, particularly in the context of a comprehensive test ban, did not contributeto the testing or refinement of nuclear weapon arsenals of nuclear-weapon States orto the acquisition of nuclear explosive capability by other States; and called uponall Member States to support and assist in the fulfilment of those tasks.

By resolution 3484 B (XXX) of 12 December 1975, the General Assembly,regretting that in recent years no significant progress had been made in the field ofdisarmament and considering that the role of the United Nations in that field wasfar from adequate in comparison with existing needs, invited all States to com-municate to the Secretary-General, not later than 1 May 1976, their views andsuggestions on the strengthening of the role of the United Nations in the field ofdisarmament; decided to establish, as a committee of the Assembly open to allMember States, an Ad Hoc Committee on the Review of the Role of the UnitedNations in that field; and decided that the review should, inter alia, focus on newapproaches for achieving more effective procedures and organization of work in thefield of disarmament, on ways and means of improving existing United Nationsfacilities for the collection, compilation and dissemination of information on dis-armament issues and on ways and means to enable the Secretariat to assist, onrequest, States parties to multilateral disarmament agreements in their duty to ensurethe effective functioning of such agreements, including appropriate periodic reviews.

By resolution 3484 C (XXX) also of 12 December 1975, the General Assembly,noting that, as a result of the discussions held in November 1974 between the Unionof Soviet Socialist Republics and the United States of America, both sides hadreaffirmed their intention to conclude an agreement on the limitation of strategicoffensive arms in the course of 1975, inter alia regretted the absence of positiveresults during the last two years of the bilateral negotiations between the Governmentsof the USSR and the United States on the limitation of their strategic nuclear weaponsystems; expressed its concern for the very high ceilings of nuclear arms set forthemselves by both States, for the total absence of qualitative limitations of sucharms, for the protracted time-table contemplated for the negotiation of furtherlimitations and possible reductions of the nuclear arsenals, and for the situation thuscreated; urged anew the USSR and the United States to broaden the scope andaccelerate the pace of their strategic nuclear arms limitation talks, and stressed onceagain the necessity and urgency of reaching agreement on important qualitativelimitations and substantial reductions of their strategic nuclear weapon systems as a

44

positive step towards nuclear disarmament; and reiterated its invitation to both Gov-ernments to keep the Assembly informed of the results of their negotiations.

By resolution 3484 E (XXX) also of 12 December 1975, the General Assembly,noting that article VII of the Treaty on the Prohibition of the Emplacement ofNuclear Weapons and Other Weapons of Mass Destruction on the Sea-Bed and theOcean Floor and in the Subsoil Thereof called for a review conference of the partiesto the Treaty five years after its entry into force, and that, after appropriate consulta-tion, a preparatory committee of the parties to the Treaty was to be arranged, requestedthe Secretary-General to render the necessary assistance as might be required for thereview conference and its preparation, and expressed hope for the widest possibleadherence to the Treaty,

II. OTHER POLITICAL AND SECURITY QUESTIONS

1. STRENGTHENING OF INTERNATIONAL SECURITY

In pursuance of paragraph 5 of General Assembly resolution 3332 (XXIX) of17 December 1974, the Secretary-General submitted to the Assembly a report onthe implementation of the Declaration on the Strengthening of International Security(A/10205 and Add.I).28 The substantive parts of replies received from 23 MemberStates, giving their views on the subject, were reproduced in the report, to which wasannexed a list of additional documents issued since the twenty-ninth session.

On 18 November 1975, the General Assembly adopted resolution 3389 (XXX)in which it solemnly called upon all States to seek strict and consistent implementation ofthe purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations and of all the provi-sions of the Declaration on the Strengthening of International Security as a basis forrelations among States, irrespective of their size, level of development and socio-economic system; also called upon all States to extend the process of détente to allregions of the world, with the equal participation of all States, in order to bringabout just and lasting solutions to international problems; reaffirmed the legitimacyof the struggle of peoples under alien domination to achieve self-determination andindependence and appealed to all States to implement the Declaration on the Grantingof Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples and the other resolutions of theUnited Nations on the total elimination of colonialism, racism and apartheid', alsoreaffirmed that any measure or pressure directed against any State while exercisingits sovereign right freely to dispose of its natural resources constituted a flagrant viola-tion of the right of self-determination of peoples and the principle of non-intervention,as set forth in the Charter, which, if pursued, could constitute a threat to internationalpeace and security; likewise reaffirmed its opposition to any threats of use of force,intervention, aggression, foreign occupation and measures of political and economiccoercion which attempted to violate the sovereignty, territorial integrity, independenceand security of States; and recommended urgent measures to stop the arms race andpromote disarmament, including the convening of the World Disarmament Conference,the dismantling of foreign military bases, the creation of zones of peace and theencouragement of general and complete disarmament and strengthening of the UnitedNations.

2. PEACEFUL USES OF OUTER SPACE

In 1975, the Legal Sub-Committee held its fourteenth session at United NationsHeadquarters from 10 February to 7 March. It continued its work on the three mainitems which have been given high priority: the draft treaty relating to the Moon,direct broadcast satellites and remote sensing of the earth from space.

28 For other relevant documents, see ibid., Thirtieth Session, Annexes, agenda item 49.

45

With respect to the draft treaty relating to the Moon, the Working Group re-established by the Sub-Committee concentrated its efforts on the main unsolved issuerelating to the status of the natural reserves of the Moon and redrafted the texts con-cerning that point, with certain parts of these texts remaining to be agreed on.

The Sub-Committee made substantial progress on the question of direct broadcastsatellites. It re-established the Working Group on this item which discussed all theprinciples involved. The texts of the principles as formulated by the Working Groupincluded agreed texts (on State responsibility, peaceful settlement of disputes andprevention of disruption), texts which were not yet agreed upon and texts withalternate versions.

With respect to remote sensing, the Sub-Committee established a Working Groupwhich discussed all the proposals and working papers before it. The areas of agree-ment and the main questions raised during discussion were sumarized in the reportof the Working Group to the Sub-Committee.

In the course of its eighteenth session held in New York from 9 to 20 June 1975,the Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space considered the report of theLegal Sub-committee on the work of its fourteenth session (A/AC. 105/147); it agreedthat, at its fifteenth session, the Sub-Committee should continue to consider, as mattersof high priority, the draft treaty relating to the Moon, the elaboration of principlesgoverning the use by States of artificial earth satellites for direct television broadcastingand the legal implications of remote sensing; and that the Sub-Committee should alsocontinue its work on matters relating to the definition and/or delimitation of outerspace and outer space activities.

In addition, the Committee requested its Scientific and Technical Sub-Committeeto transmit to the Legal Sub-Committee at its fifteenth session, its findings regardingpossible scientific and technical criteria relevant to the definition, for purposes ofremote sensing, of the terms "natural resources of the Earth" and "data on thenatural resources of the Earth acquired by means of remote sensing".

On the basis of the report of the Committee on the Peaceful Uses of OuterSpace,29 the General Assembly adopted resolution 3388 (XXX) of 18 November1975, by which it inter alia noted with satisfaction the progress achieved by the LegalSub-Committee at its fourteenth session and recommended that the Sub-Committeeshould, at its fifteenth session, as matters of high priority: continue to consider thedraft treaty relating to the Moon; continue to consider the elaboration of principlesgoverning the use by States of artificial earth satellites for direct television broad-casting; continue its detailed legal consideration of remote sensing, taking into accountthe various views expressed on the subject, including proposals for draft internationalinstruments; and proceed to the drafting of principles.

III. ECONOMIC, SOCIAL AND HUMANITARIAN ACTIVITIES

1. HUMAN RIGHTS QUESTIONS

. (a) International Convention on the Elimination of All Formaof Racial Discrimination

The International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Dis-crimination, adopted by the General Assembly in resolution 2106 A (XX) of 21 De-

29 Official Records of the General Assembly, Thirtieth Session, Supplement No. 20(A/10020). For other relevant documents, see ibid., Thirtieth Session, Annexes, agendaitems 32 and 33.

46

cember 1965, entered into force on 4 January 1969. As at 3 December 1975, theSecretary-General had received instruments of ratification, accession or notificationof succession from 87 States.30 In addition, four of the States parties to the Conventionhave made declarations in accordance with article 14 of the Convention recognizingthe competence of the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination31 toreceive and consider communications from individuals or groups of individuals withintheir jurisdiction claiming to be victims of a violation by the States parties concernedof any of the rights set forth in the Convention. Under article 14, paragraph 9, ofthe Convention, 10 declarations are necessary to establish the competence of theCommittee to exercise this function.

On 10 November 1975, the General Assembly adopted resolution 3381 (XXX)in which it inter alia expressed its satisfaction with the increase in ratifications andappealed to States which had not done so to accede to the Convention and to Statesparties to consider making the declaration under article 14 of the Convention.

The Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination submitted its sixthannual report to the General Assembly at its thirtieth session, covering its eleventh andtwelfth sessions.32

(b) International Convention on the Suppression and Punishmentof the Crime of Apartheid

The General Assembly, in resolution 3068 (XXVIII) of 30 November 1973,adopted and opened for signature and ratification the International Convention onthe Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid. Under the provisions ofarticle XV, the Convention will enter into force on the thirtieth day after the depositwith the Secretary-General of the United Nations of the twentieth instrument ofratification or accession. As at 31 December 1975, the Secretary-General had receivedinstruments of ratification or accession from 16 States.33

On 10 November 1975, the General Assembly adopted resolution 3380 (XXX)in which it inter alia appealed to the Governments of all States to sign, ratify andimplement the International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of theCrime of Apartheid without delay.34

(c) Torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment orpunishment in relation to detention and imprisonment

At its twenty-eighth session, the Sub-Commission on Prevention of Discriminationand Protection of Minorities,35 in considering the item entitled "The question of thehuman rights of persons subjected to any form of detention or imprisonment", had

30 For the list of those States see Multilateral Treaties in respect of which the Secretary-General Performs Depositary Functions (ST/LEG/SER.D/9; United Nations publication,Sales No. E.76.V.7).

31 For the membership of the Committee, see Official Records of the General Assembly,Thirtieth Session, Supplement No. 18 (A/10018), annex II.

32 Official Records of the General Assembly, Thirtieth Session, Supplement No. 18(A/10018). For other relevant documents see ibid., Thirtieth Session, Annexes, agendaitem 68.

33 For the list of those States, see Multilateral Treaties in respect of which the Secretary-General Performs Depositary Functions (ST/LEG/SER.D/9; United Nations publication,Sales No. A.76.V.7). The Convention came into force on 18 July 1976.

34 For relevant documents, see Official Records of the General Assembly, ThirtiethSession, Annexes, agenda item 68.

35 For the membership of the Sub-Commission, see Official Records of the Economicand Social Council, Fifty-eighth Session, Supplement No. 4 (A/5635), para, 198. For thereport of the Sub-Commission on its twenty-eighth session, see document E/CN.4/1180.

47

before it a note by the Secretary-General (E/CN.4/Sub.2/359 and Add.l) and a dossiercontaining the replies of non-governmental organizations in consultative status with theEconomic and Social Council.

On 10 September 1975, the Sub-Commission adopted resolution 4 (XXVIII) inwhich it invited the Commission on Human Rights to give urgent consideration to theStudy of the Right of Everyone to be Free from Arbitrary Arrest, Detention andExile?* and the draft principles annexed to it; requested the Secretary-General to inviteGovernments, specialized agencies, regional intergovernmental organizations and non-governmental organizations in consultative status with the Economic and Social Councilconcerned to provide any reliably attested information on the question, in particularrelating to the following problems: the prolonged and often indefinite detention of largenumbers of unconvicted persons without formal charges brought against them, thenecessity of impartial judicial investigation into alleged illegal practices against arrestedand detained persons, the lack or ineffectiveness of judicial control over arrest anddetention practices, the role of secret police and paramilitary organizations, the positionof the family and relatives of arrested and detained persons, and the special problemsrelating to the human rights of women detained or imprisoned; requested the Secretary-General to submit the information received to the Sub-Commission at its twenty-ninth session; and asked the Secretary-General to make available to the Sub-Commis-sion a report on the work done by the Fifth United Nations Congress on the Preven-tion of Crime and the Treatment of Offenders in so far as it touched upon the questionof the human rights of persons subjected to any form of detention or imprisonment.

The General Assembly, at its thirtieth session, had before it an analytical sum-mary by the Secretary-General of the information received from Member States inaccordance with General Assembly resolution 3218 (XXIX) of 6 November 1974(A/10158 and Corr.l and Add.l)37 and a report of the Secretary-General reflectingthe results of the Fifth United Nations Congress on the Prevention of Crime andthe Treatment of Offenders and containing the proposal of the Congress for a draftDeclaration on the Protection of All Persons from Being Subjected to Torture andOther Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (A/10260). In addi-tion, the Assembly received information concerning the question of medical ethicsin relation to the protection of detained persons against torture and other cruel, in-human or degrading treatment or punishment, including the text of the Draft Declara-tion of Tokyo prepared by the World Medical Association on this subject (A/C.3/641)and the working paper on health aspects of avoidable maltreatment of prisoners and de-tainees prepared for the Congress by the World Health Organization (A/CONF.56/9).

By resolution 3452 (XXX) of 9 December 1975, the General Assembly adoptedthe Declaration on the Protection of All Persons from Being Subjected to Tortureand Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment as a guideline forall States and other entities exercising effective power. The text of the Declarationreads as follows:

"DECLARATION ON THE PROTECTION OF ALL PERSONS FROM BEING SUBJECTED TOTORTURE AND OTHER CRUEL, INHUMAN OR DEGRADING TREATMENT OR PUNISH-MENT

"Article 1

"1. For the purpose of this Declaration, torture means any act by whichsevere pain or suffering, whether physical or mental is intentionally inflicted by

36 United Nations publication, Sales No.: 65.XIV.2.8? For other relevant documents, see Official Records of the General Assembly, Thirtieth


48

or at the instigation of a public official on a person for such purposes as obtainingfrom him or a third person information or confession, punishing him for an acthe has committed or is suspected of having committed, or intimidating him orother persons. It does not include pain or suffering arising only from, inherentin or incidental to lawful sanctions to the extent consistent with the StandardMinimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners.

"2. Torture constitutes an aggravated and deliberate form of cruel, inhumanor degrading treatment or punishment.

"Article 2

"Any act of torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment orpunishment is an offence to human dignity and shall be condemned as a denialof the purposes of the Charter of the United Nations and as a violation of humanrights and fundamental freedoms proclaimed in the Universal Declaration ofHuman Rights.

"Article 3

"No State may permit or tolerate torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrad-ing treatment or punishment. Exceptional circunmstances such as a state of waror a threat of war, internal political instability or any other public emergencymay not be invoked as a justification of torture or other cruel, inhuman ordegrading treatment or punishment.

"Article 4

"Each State shall, in accordance with the provisions of this Declaration,take effective measures to prevent torture and other cruel, inhuman or degradingtreatment or punishment from being practised within its jurisdiction.

"Article 5

"The training of law enforcement personnel and of other public officialswho may be responsible for persons deprived of their liberty shall ensure thatfull account is taken of the prohibition against torture and other cruel, inhumanor degrading treatment or punishment. This prohibition shall also, where appro-priate, be included in such general rules or instructions as are issued in regardto the duties and functions of anyone who may be involved in the custody ortreatment of such persons.

"Article 6

"Each State shall keep under systematic review interrogation methods andpractices as well as arrangements for the custody and treatment of persons de-prived of their liberty in its territory, with a view to preventing any cases oftorture or other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.

"Article 7

"Each State shall ensure that all acts of torture as defined in article 1 areoffences under its criminal law. The same shall apply in regard to acts whichconstitute participation in, complicity in, incitement to or an attempt to committorture.

"Article 8

"Any person who alleges he has been subjected to torture or other cruel,inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment by or at the instigation of a

49

public official shall have the right to complain to, and to have his case impartiallyexamined by, the competent authorities of the State concerned.

"Article 9

"Wherever there is reasonable ground to believe that an act of torture asdefined in article 1 has been committed, the competent authorities of the Stateconcerned shall promptly proceed to an impartial investigation even if therehas been no formal complaint.

"Article 10

"If an investigation under article 8 or article 9 establishes that an act oftorture as defined in article 1 appears to have been committed, criminal proceed-ings shall be instituted against the alleged offender or offenders in accordance withnational law. If an allegation of other forms of cruel, inhuman or degradingtreatment or punishment is considered to be well founded, the alleged offenderor offenders shall be subject to criminal, disciplinary or other appropriate pro-ceedings.

"Article 11

"Where it is proved that an act of torture or other cruel, inhuman or degrad-ing treatment or punishment has been committed by or at the instigation of apublic official, the victim shall be afforded redress and compensation, in accord-ance with national law.

"Article 12

"Any statement which is established to have been made as a result of tortureor other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment may not be invokedas evidence against the person concerned or against any other person in anyproceedings."Also on 9 December 1975, the General Assembly adopted resolution 3453 (XXX)

in which it requested the Commission on Human Rights, at its thirty-second session,to study the question of torture and any necessary steps for ensuring the effectiveobservance of the above-mentioned Declaration and for the formulation of a bodyof principles for the protection of all persons under any form of detention or im-prisonment on the basis of the Study of the Right of Everyone to be Free fromArbitrary Arrest, Detention and Exile and the draft principles contained therein;requested the Committee on Crime Prevention and Control to elaborate a draft codeof conduct for law enforcement officiais and to submit this draft code to the Assemblyat its thirty-second session, through the Commission for Social Development andthe Economic and Social Council; invited WHO to give further attention to the studyand elaboration of principles of medical ethics relevant to the protection of personssubjected to any form of detention or imprisonment against torture and other cruel,inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, and decided to include in the provi-sional agenda of its thirty-first session an item entitled "Torture and other cruel,inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment" for the purpose of reviewing theprogress achieved in accordance with resolution 3453 (XXX).

(d) Human rights of migrant workers

At its twenty-eighth session, the Sub-Commission on Prevention of Discriminationand Protection of Minorities had before it the final version of the report of the SpecialRapporteur, entitled "Exploitation of labour through illicit and clandestine trafficking"

50

(E/CN/4/Sub.2/L.629). The Special Rapporteur, with the assistance of an informalWorking Group,38 also submitted draft recommendations on the subject (E/CN.4/Sub.2/L.636).

On 10 September 1975, the Sub-Commission adopted resolution 1 (XXVIII)by which it decided to request the Secretariat to consolidate the preliminary report, thefinal report, the introductory statements and the draft recommendations of the SpecialRapporteur in a single document and to send it to the Commission on Human Rightsas reflecting the current status of the work on the subject in the Sub-Commission.It also decided to place the item on the agenda of its twenty-ninth session and toconsider the draft recommendations at that session.

At its thirtieth session, the General Assembly considered the item entitled "Meas-ures to ensure the human rights and dignity of all migrant workers".39 On 9 December1975, it adopted resolution 3449 (XXX) in which it requested the United Nationsorgans and specialized agencies concerned to utilize in all official documents the term"non-documented or irregular migrant workers" to define those workers who illegallyand/or surreptitiously enter another country to obtain work; appealed to MemberStates to remind their competent administrative authorities of their obligations torespect the human rights of all migrant workers, including those non-documentedor irregular; and urged Member States to grant all facilities and help to diplomaticand consular agents accredited in their countries in order for them to fulfil theirfunctions in relation to the protection and defence of the human rights of migrantworkers, including those non-documented or irregular.

(e) Human rights and scientific and technological development

At its thirtieth session, the General Assembly had before it a note by the Secretary-General (A/10162)40 containing background information on the item; a report ofthe Secretary-General (A/10146) prepared in accordance wilh paragraph 5 of Assem-bly resolution 3150 (XXVIII) of 14 December 1973; and the comments receivedas at 15 October 1975 from Member States (A/10226 and Add.l and 2) on the draftdeclaration on the use of scientific and technological progress in the interests ofpeace and for the benefit of mankind and the proposed amendments thereto (A/C.3/L.2144, A/C.3/L.2146-2148).

On 10 November 1975, the General Assembly, by resolution 3384 (XXX),adopted the Declaration on the Use of Scientific and Technological Progress in theInterests of Peace and for the Benefit of Mankind.

The text of the Declaration reads as follows:

"1. All States shall promote international co-operation to ensure that theresults of scientific and technological developments are used in the interests ofstrengthening international peace and security, freedom and independence, andalso for the purpose of the economic and social development of peoples and therealization of human rights and freedoms in accordance with the Charter of theUnited Nations.

"2. All States shall take appropriate measures to prevent the use of scien-tific and technological developments, particularly by the State organs, to limitor interfere with the enjoyment of the human rights and fundamental freedomsof the individual as enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights,

38 For the membership of the Working Group, see E/CN.4/1180, para. 143.39 For relevant documents, see Official Records of the General Assembly, Thirtieth

Session, Annexes, agenda item 12.40 For other relevant documents, see ibid., Thirtieth Session, agenda item 69.

51

the International Covenants on Human Rights and other relevant internationalinstruments.

"3. All States shall take measures to ensure that scientific and technologicalachievements satisfy the material and spiritual needs of all sectors of the pop-ulation.

"4. All States shall refrain from any acts involving the use of scientific andtechnological achievements for the purposes of violating the sovereignty andterritorial integrity of other States, interfering in their internal affairs, wagingaggressive wars, suppressing national liberation movements, or pursuing a policyof racial discrimination. Such acts are not only a flagrant violation of the Charterof the United Nations and principles of international law, but constitute an inad-missible distortion of the purposes that should guide scientific and technologicaldevelopments for the benefit of mankind.

"5. All States shall co-operate in the establishment, strengthening and de-velopment of the scientific and technological capacity of developing countries witha view to accelerating the realization of the social and economic rights Of thepeoples of those countries.

"6. All States shall take measures to extend the benefits of science andtechnology to all strata of the population and to protect them, both socially andmaterially, from possible harmful effects of the misuse of scientific and tech-nological developments, including their misuse to infringe upon the rights ofthe individual or of the group, particularly with regard to respect for privacyand the protection of the human personality and its physical and intellectualintegrity.

"7 All States shall take the necessary measures, including legislative meas-ures, to ensure that the utilization of scientific and technological achievementspromotes the fullest realization of human rights and fundamental freedomswithout any discrimination whatsoever on grounds of race, sex, language or reli-gious beliefs.

"8. All States shall take effective measures, including legislative measures,to prevent and preclude the utilization of scientific and technological achieve-ments to the detriment of human rights and fundamental freedoms and thedignity of the human person.

"9. All States shall, whenever necessary, take action to ensure compliancewith legislation guaranteeing human rights and freedoms in the conditions ofscientific and technological developments."

2. ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL QUESTIONS

(a) Crime prevention and criminal justice

The Fifth United Nations Congress on the Prevention of Crime and the Treat-ment of Offenders was originally scheduled to be convened at Toronto, with theGovernment of Canada acting as host, from 1 to 12 September 1975. Acting on arequest by the Government of Canada for a postponement of the Congress for oneyear, the Committee on Conferences recommended instead that the Congress beconvened at the Palais des Nations, Geneva, on the dates originally scheduled.41

Close to 1,000 participants from 101 countries attended the Congress (see A/CONF.56/10),42 which had as its general theme "Crime prevention and control

41 See ibid., Thirtieth Session, Supplement No. 32 (A/10032), paras. 22-26.42 For the report of the Congress, see United Nations publication, Sales No. E.76.IV.2.

52

—the challenge of the last quarter of the century". The agenda of the Congressincluded the following items: (a) changes in forms and dimensions of criminality—transnational and national; (Z>) criminal legislation, judicial procedures and otherforms of social control in the prevention of crime; (c) emerging roles of the policeand other law enforcement agencies, with special reference to changing expectationsand minimum standards of performance; (d) treatment of offenders, in custody orin the community, with special reference to the implementation of the StandardMinimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners43 adopted by the United Nations;and (e) economic and social consequences of crime: new challenges for research andplanning.

A series of recommendations called for increased efforts, at both the nationaland international levels, to fight crime and strengthen the criminal justice system.Pursuant to General Assembly resolution 3218 (XXIX) of 6 November 1974, theCongress unanimously adopted a declaration containing detailed provisions on theprohibition of the use of torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatmentor punishment, and for remedial and compensatory measures.44 The Congress alsoconcluded that an international code of conduct for law enforcement officials shouldbe drawn up under the auspices of the Assembly.

(b) Status of women

Elaboration and Implementation of international instruments

In resolution 3521 (XXX) of 15 December 1975 on equality between men andwomen and elimination of discrimination against women,45 the General Assembly,recalling the provisions of the Charter which, inter alia, emphasize the importance ofthe respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms for all without distinctionas to race, sex, language or religion and for the equality of men and women andnoting that all States were not yet parties to relevant conventions and other instru-ments elaborated by the United Nations, ILO, UNESCO and other United Nationsbodies, called upon all States that had not yet done so to ratify the internationalconventions and other instruments concerning the protection of women's rights andthe elimination of discrimination against women and to implement effectively theprovisions of these conventions and other instruments, including declarations of theUnited Nations and recommendations of ILO and UNESCO and requested the Com-mission on the Status of Women to complete, in 1976, the elaboration of the draftConvention on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women.

(c) Rights of disabled persons

In resolution 3447 (XXX) of 9 December 1975, the General Assembly pro-claimed a Declaration on the Rights of Disabled Persons.4"

3. UNITED NATIONS ENVIRONMENT PROGRAMME

(a) Intergovernmental Meeting on the Protection of the Mediterranean

In conformity with the decisions taken by the Governing Council of UNEP atits second session, the Executive Director convened at Barcelona, from 28 January to

43 For the text of the Rules, see Report of the First United Nations Congress on thePrevention of Crime and the Treatment of Offenders (United Nations publication, Sales No.:56.IV.4).

44 As indicated in subsection 1 (c) above, this declaration was adopted, in a slightlyrevised form, by the General Assembly in resolution 3452 (XXX) of 9 December 1975.

46 For relevant documents, see Official Records of the General Assembly, ThirtiethSession, Annexes, agenda items 75 and 76.

46 For relevant documents, see ibid., agenda item 12.

53

4 February 1975, an Intergovernmental Meeting on the Protection of the Medi-terranean.

The meeting, which was attended by representatives of 16 out of the 18 Medi-terranean coastal States and observers, unanimously agreed on an action plan toprotect the Mediterranean Sea (UNEP/WG.2/5).

It was also agreed that a plenipotentiary conference for the signing of a frame-work convention by all Mediterranean coastal States, as recommended in the ActionPlan, should be convened by UNEP from 2 to 13 February 1976 at Barcelona.

(b) Third session of the Governing Council

At its third session, held in Nairobi from 17 April to 2 May 1975,47 the Govern-ing Council urged alt States to become parties to existing international conventionsor protocols in the field of environment as soon as possible, and requested the Execu-tive Director to assist States, on request, in preparing legislative measures or othermeasures necessary for adherence to the conventions in the field of environment andmanagement and to keep the Council informed of new conventions as well as thestatus of existing ones.48

The Council urged the Third United Nations Conference on the Law of the Seato give the highest priority to incorporating into the draft treaties under its considera-tion effective provisions for the protection of the marine environment.40

(c) Action by the General Assembly

By resolution 3436 (XXX) of 9 December 1975 on conventions and protocolsin the field of the environment, the Assembly requested the Executive Director ofUNEP to take such measures as might be necessary for the realization of the objec-tives and the implementation of the strategies relating to the programme of UNEP inthe field of national and international environmental law; urged all States entitled tobecame parties, as appropriate, to existing conventions and protocols in the field ofthe environment to do so as soon as possible: and requested the Governing Councilof UNEP to keep it informed annually of any new international convention con-cluded in the field of the environment and of the status of existing conventions, aswell as of the intention of Governments to become parties to such conventions.

4. HUMANITARIAN ACTIVITIES

Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees5®

The protection activities of UNHCR, which constitute the High Commissioner'sprimary task, called for considerable expansion in the period under review. This waslargely due to the over-all increase in the number of persons of concern to his Officeand to the emergence of new refugee problems in countries which are not partiesto the basic legal instruments relating to the status of refugees, that is, the Conventionrelating to the Status of Refugees of 28 July 195151 and the 1967 Protocol thereto.52

Moreover, the rate of new accessions to these instruments has remained very low.New positive measures with a view to the granting of asylum were adopted in

a few instances. However, recurrent violations of the principles of asylum and non-

47 For the report of the Governing Council on its third session, see Official Records ofthe General Assembly, Thirtieth Session, Supplement No. 25 (A/10025).

., decision 24 (III).id., decision 25 (III).

50 For detailed information, see Official Records of the General Assembly, ThirtiethSession, Supplement No. 12 (A/10012) and Supplement No. 12A (A/10012/Add.l). Seealso ibid., Annexes, agenda item 80.

51 United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 189, p. 137.52 Ibid., vol, 606, p. 267. Also reproduced in the Juridical Yearbook, 1967, p. 285.

54

refoulement and many cases of abduction of refugees called for renewed intervention bythe High Commissioner with the Governments concerned in an effort to safeguard thebasic human rights of refugees. At its twenty-sixth session, held in October 1975, theExecutive Committee of the High Commissioner's Programme53 expressed grave con-cern at these developments. Following its recommendation, an appeal was madeurging States Members of the United Nations and non-member States to conformfully with the humanitarian principles governing the protection of refugees. Theappeal called in particular for States scrupulously to observe the principle wherebyno refugee should be forcibly returned to a country where he fears persecution.54

The Group of Experts55 convened under General Assembly resolution 3272(XXIX) of 10 December 1974 met at Geneva from 28 April to 9 May 1975 toreview the draft text of the proposed Convention on Territorial Asylum. The reportof the Secretary-General on the meeting (A/10177 and Corr.l) was transmitted tothe Assembly, which decided in its resolution 3456 (XXX) of 9 December 1975 toconvene a conference of plenipotentiaries from 10 January to 4 February 1977 toconsider and adopt a Convention on Territorial Asylum. The Secretary-General wasrequested, meanwhile to refer the report of the Group of Experts to Member Statesfor observation and comments they might wish to make before the plenipotentiaryconference.

Following ratification by the sixth State, the Convention on the Reduction ofStatelessness of 30 August 1961 (A/CONF.9/15) entered into force in December1975. In resolution 3274 (XXIX) of 10 December 1974, the General Assemblyrequested the Office of the High Commissioner to act provisionally as supervisorybody for this instrument, which seeks to help eliminate the perpetuation of refugeestatus by enabling children born of stateless parents on the territory of a contractingState to acquire the nationality of that State.

Existing international instruments of benefit to refugees to which new accessionswere recorded include the Convention relating to the Status of Stateless Persons of28 September 1954,56 The Hague Agreement relating to Refugee Seamen of 23 Novem-ber 195757 and its Protocol of 12 June 1973 and the OUA Convention Governing theSpecific Aspects of Refugee Problems in Africa of 10 September 1969.58

Continued efforts were made throughout the year to ensiure effective implementa-tion of the Convention relating to the Status of Refugees of 1951 and the Protocolrelating to the Status of Refugees of 1967, and to encourage the adoption of specificmeasures at the national level for the benefit of refugees. Special attention focusedon the establishment or improvement of procedures for the determination of refugeestatus in order that applications of asylum-seekers might receive rapid consideration.In view of the uncertain economic conditions prevailing in many countries, carefulattention was also given to refugees' access to employment. Welcome measures weretaken for this purpose by a number of Governments, especially in Europe.

Accelerated admission procedures were applied, particularly for the benefit offamily members of refugees from Chile, in order to facilitate the reunion of refugee

53 For the membership of the Executive Committee, see Official Records of the GeneralAssembly, Thirtieth Session, Supplement No. 12A (A/10012/Add.l), para. 3.

54 Official Records of the General Assembly, Thirtieth Session, Supplement No. 12A(A/10012/Add.l), paras. 49 (c) and 69 (6).

55 For the membership of the Group of Experts, see A/10177 and Corr.l, para. 2.56 United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 360, p. 130. As at 31 March 1975, 29 States were

parties to that Convention.w Ibid., vol. 506, p. 125. As at 31 March 1975, 19 States were parties to that Agreement.5« Organization of African Unity, document CM/267/Rev.l. As at 31 March 1975, 16

States were parties to that Convention.

55

families within countries of resettlement. A number of positive replies were alsoreceived to the applications submitted to national authorities by UNHCR for thebenefit of relatives of refugees seeking authorization to leave their country for reunionpurposes.

5. DRUG ABUSE CONTROL

As at 31 December 1975, one hundred and six States were parties to the SingleConvention on Narcotic Drugs, 1961.59- 60 On 8 August 1975, the 1972 Protocol amend-ing the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs, 1961,61 came into force; as at 31December 1975, 46 States were parties to that Protocol.62

By its resolution 3443 (XXX) of 9 December 1975 entitled "1971 Conventionon Psychotropic Substances",63 the General Assembly, recalling its resolution 3147(XXVIII) of 14 December 1973 which stresses the importance to international drugcontrol of universal accession to the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs, 1961,the 1971 Convention on Psychotropic Substances64 and the 1972 Protocol Amendingthe Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs, 1961, expressed its satisfaction that during1975 several additional countries had become parties to these treaties, expressed thehope that the 1971 Convention on Psychotropic Substances would soon enter intoforce and urged all countries, in particular those directly concerned in the manufacture,production of and trade in psychotropic substances, not yet parties to the 1971 Con-vention to take urgent action to adhere to it. As at 31 December 1975, 34 Stateshad become parties to the Convention.65

The International Narcotics Control Board, an organ created by treaty to supervisethe implementation by Governments of the various drug control agreements, issuedits report for 1975 (E/INCB/29).66

IV. THIRD UNITED NATIONS CONFERENCEON THE LAW OF THE SEA

At the opening meeting of its third session, which was held from 17 March to10 May 1975 at Geneva,67 the Conference decided to add the word "Arabic" in rule56 of its rules of procedures and a new rule 63A covering the observers invited pursuantto the request made to the Secretary-General under General Assembly resolution 3334(XXIX).

Also at the first meeting, the Conference heard a message from the Secretary-General of the United Nations as well as a statement by its President. On the proposalof the President, it agreed that it was desirable that the Main Committees shouldimmediately initiate the process of negotiation, avoiding general debate and allowing

59 United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 520, p. 151. A commentary on the Conventionhas been issued as a United Nations publication (Sales No. E.73.XI.1).

60 For the list of the States parties, see Multilateral Treaties in respect of which theSecretary-General Performs Depositary Functions (ST/LEG/SER.D/9; United Nationspublication, Sales No. E.76.V.7).

61 E/CONF.63/9. A commentary on the Convention has been issued under the symbolE/INCB/31 as a United Nations publication (Sales No. E.76.XI.5).

62 See foot-note 60 above.63 For relevant documents, see Official Records of the General Assembly, Thirtieth

Session, Annexes, agenda item 12.64 E/CONF.58/6. A commentary on the Protocol has been issued under the symbol

E/CN.7/588 as a United Nations publication (Sales No. E.76.XI.6).65 See foot-note 60 above. The Convention came into force on 16 August 1976.66 United Nations publication, Sales No. E.76.XI.2.67 For the proceedings of the third session of the Conference, see Official Records of

the Third United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea, vol. IV (United Nationspublication, Sales No. E.75.V.10).

56

ample time for consultations and negotiations. The work of the session was carriedout mainly through informal meetings, both of an ad hoc nature and within the formalframework of the Conference. The General Committee met periodically to hearreports by the Chairmen of the Main Committees concerning the progress of thework. On 18 April 1975, the President of the Conference, in accordance with a com-mitment made at the first meeting of the session, presented an evaluation of theprogress of work of the Conference.

After discussion of this evaluation by the Conference and consideration of theproposal by the President that an informal single negotiating text should be prepared,the Conference requested the Chairman of the three Main Committees each to prepare,before the end of the session, a single negotiating text covering the subjects entrustedto his Committee, taking into account all the formal and informal discussions heldso far. The text would not prejudice the position of any delegation and would notrepresent any negotiated text or accepted compromise. The Chairmen themselves woulddecide whom to consult and how. In the negotiations, any representative wouldbe free to move amendments. The informal single negotiating text prepared bythe Chairman of each Main Committee was circulated (A/CONF.62/WP.8) on 9May 1975. Each part of the text was prefaced by an introductory note by thePresident, in which he stated that it should be quite clear that the single negotiatedtext would serve as a procedural device and only provide a basis for negotiation andshould not in any way be regarded as affecting cither the status of proposals alreadymade by delegations or the right of delegations to submit amendments or new proposals.

The Conference then recommended to the General Assembly that the fourthsession of the United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea should be held inNew York from 9 March to 21 May 1976 and that a decision regarding a fifth sessionin 1976 should be left to its fourth session. The Conference further decided to requestthe General Assembly to accord priority to the work of the Conference in relation toother United Nations activities.

In a concluding statement, the President of the Conference, referring to anexpression of concern by members of the Group of Seventy-seven about possibleunilateral action in regard to the exploration and exploitation of the mineral resourcesof the deep sea-bed, appealed to all States to refrain from taking any action, andalso to use their powers to restrain their nationals from taking any action or adoptingany measures which would place in jeopardy the conclusion of a universally acceptabletreaty of a just and equitable nature. He also brought to the notice of the Conferencean appeal by the Chairman of the Group of Land-locked and Geographically Disad-vantaged States to the effect that there should be no unilateral extensions of nationaljurisdiction.

V. INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE68- 69

Cases submitted to the Court70

WESTERN SAHARA(Request for an advisory opinion)

By resolution 3292 (XXIX) of 13 December 1974, the General Assembly hadrequested the Court to give an advisory opinion on the following questions:

68 For the composition of the Court, see Official Records of the General Assembly,Thirtieth Session, Supplement No. 34 (A/10034), p. xiv.

69 As of 31 December 1975, the number of States accepting the compulsory jurisdictionof the Court under Article 36, paragraph 2, stood at 45.

7° For detailed information, see I.C.J. Reports 1975, pp. 6 and 12; I.C.J. Yearbook1974-1975, No. 29; and l.CJ. Yearbook 1975-1976, No. 30.

57

"I. Was Western Sahara (Rio de Oro and Sakiet El Hamra) at the timeof colonization by Spain a territory belonging to no one (terra nullius)?"

If the answer to the first question is in the negative,

"II. What were the legal ties between this territory and the Kingdom ofMorocco and the Mauritanian entity?"

On 16 October 1975, the Court delivered its advisory opinion.

With regard to question I, "Was Western Sahara (Rio de Oro and Sakiet ElHamra) at the time of colonization by Spain a territory belonging to no one (terranullius)?", the Court:

(a) Decided by 13 votes to 3 to comply with the request for an advisoryopinion;

(b) Was unanimously of opinion that Western Sahara (Rio de Oro and SakietEl Hamra) at the time of colonization by Spain was not a territory belonging to noone (terra nullius).

With regard to question II, "What were the legal ties between this territory andthe Kingdom of Morocco and the" Mauritanian entity?", the Court:

(à) Decided by 14 votes to 2 to comply with the request for an advisory opinion;

(b) Was of opinion, by 14 votes to 2, that there had been legal ties betweenthis territory and the Kingdom of Morocco of the kinds indicated in the penultimateparagraph of the advisory opinion.

The penultimate paragraph of the Advisory Opinion reads as follows:

"The materials and information presented to the Court show the existence,at the time of Spanish colonization, of legal ties of allegiance between the Sultanof Morocco and some of the tribes living in the territory of Western Sahara. Theyequally show the existence of rights including some rights relating to the land,which constituted legal ties between the Mauritanian entity, as understood by theCourt, and the territory of Western Sahara. On the other hand, the Court's con-clusion is that the materials and information presented to it do not establish anytie of territorial sovereignty between the territory of Western "Sahara and theKingdom of Morocco or the Mauritanian entity. Thus the Court has not foundlegal ties of such a nature as might affect the application of General Assemblyresolution 1514 (XV) in the decolonization of Western Sahara and, in particular,of the principle of self-determination through the free and genuine expression ofthe will of the peoples of the Territory."

The General Assembly took note of the advisory opinion in its resolution 3458(XXX) of 10 December 1975.

VI. INTERNATIONAL LAW COMMISSION71

TWENTY-SEVENTH SESSION OF THE COMMISSION72

At its twenty-seventh session, held at Geneva from 5 May to 25 July 1975, theInternational Law Commission continued to make substantial progress in the devel-opment of international law and its codification. The Commission devoted its session

71 For the membership of the Commission, see Official Records of the General Assembly,Thirty-first Session, Supplement No. 10 (A.31/10), chap. 1.

72 For detailed information, see Yearbook of the International Law Commission, 1975,vol Ï and II (United Nations publication, Sales Nos. E.76.V.3 and E.76.V.4).

58

to the examination of reports submitted by the Special Rapporteurs on the followingtopics: State responsibility; succession of States in respect of matters other thantreaties; most-favoured-nation clause; and questions of treaties concluded between Statesand international organizations or between two or more international organizations.On all of those topics, the Commission adopted in first reading a series of draftarticles, together with commentaries. The Commission also reached conclusions on thegeneral goals towards which its efforts should be directed, on the basis of an over-allreview of the existing programme of work made by a planning group set up duringthe session.

CONSIDERATION BY THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY

On 15 December 1975, the General Assembly adopted resolution 3495 (XXX)concerning the report of the International Law Commission on the work of its twenty-seventh session.73 In the resolution, the Assembly, inter alia, recommended that theCommission should complete at its twenty-eighth session the first reading of draftarticles on the most-favoured-nation clause; continue on a high priority basis its workon State responsibility with a view to completing the preparation of a first set of draftarticles on responsibility of States for internationally wrongful acts at the earliestpossible time and take up, as soon as appropriate, the separate topic of internationalliability for injurious consequences arising out of acts not prohibited by internationallaw; proceed with the preparation, on a priority basis, of draft articles on successionof States in respect of matters other than treaties; proceed with the preparation ofdraft articles on treaties concluded between States and international organizations orbetween international organizations; and continue its study of the law of the non-navigational uses of international watercourses. In addition, the Assembly expressedconfidence that the Commission would review the progress of its work and adopt,in the light of such a review, the methods of work best suited to the speedy realizationof the tasks entrusted to it.

VII. UNITED NATIONS COMMISSION ON INTERNATIONALTRADE LAW74

The United Nations Commission on International Trade Law continued to makesubstantial progress in the unification and harmonization of the law of internationaltrade.

The eighth session of the Commission was held at Geneva from 1 to 18April 1975.75 The Commission devoted its session to the examination of reportsfrom the Working Group on the International Sale of Goods, the Working Groupon International Negotiable Instruments and the Working Group on InternationalLegislation on Shipping and to the consideration of reports on general conditions ofsale and standard contracts, security interest in goods, liability for damage caused byproducts intended for or involved in international trade, international commercialarbitration and multinational enterprises. The Commission requested the Secretary-General to transmit the draft Convention on the International Sale of Goods, whencompleted by the Working Group, to Governments and interested international organ-

73 Official Records of the General Assembly, Thirtieth Session, Supplement No. 10(A/10010/Rev.l). For other relevant documents, see ibid., Thirtieth Session, Annexes,agenda item 108.

74 For the membership of the Commission, see Official Records of the General Assembly,Thirtieth Session, Supplement No. 17 (A/10017), chap. I, sect. B.

75 For detailed information, see Yearbook of the United Nations Commission onInternational Trade Law, vol. VI, 1975 (United Nations publication, Sales No. E.76.V.5).

59

izations for their comments and to prepare an analysis of such comments for consid-eration by the Commission at its tenth session. The Commission also commended theuse of the 1974 revision by the International Chamber of Commerce of "UniformCustoms and Practice for Documentary Credits".

The Commission decided to consider the draft Convention on the Carriage ofGoods by Sea at its ninth session; it further requested the Secretary-General toprepare a revised text of the draft set of arbitration rules hi accordance with thecomments made by the Commission at its eighth session and to submit a report forthe Commission's consideration at its ninth session.

In connexion with the session of the Commission, a symposium was held from14 to 18 April 1975 on the role of universities and research centres in the teaching,dissemination and wider appreciation of international trade law.

The report of the Commission on the work of its eighth session76 was consideredby the General Assembly at its thirtieth session. In resolution 3494 (XXX) of 15December 1975, the Assembly inter alia noted with satisfaction that a draft conventionon the carriage of goods by sea had been transmitted to Governments and interestedinternational organizations for their comments and that work on a draft conventionon the international sale of goods was nearing completion and would be transmitted toGovernments and interested international organizations for their comments in thenear future.

VIII. OTHER LEGAL QUESTIONS

1. UNITED NATIONS CONFERENCE ON THE REPRESENTATION OF STATES IN THEIRRELATIONS WITH INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS

The United Nations Conference on the Representation of States in Their Rela-tions with International Organizations was held at Vienna, at the invitation of theGovernment of Austria, from 4 February to 14 March 1975.77 At the conclusion ofits work the Conference adopted the Vienna Convention on the Representation ofStates in Their Relations with International Organizations of a Universal Character,78

which progressively develops and codifies this subject of international law, thus com-pleting the codification of diplomatic law. The Conference also adopted a Final Actand five resolutions which are annexed to the Final Act.79

2. CONFERENCE OF PLENIPOTENTIARIES ON SUCCESSION OF STATESIN RESPECT OF TREATIES

By resolution 3496 (XXX) of 15 December 1975, the General Assembly decidedto convene a conference of plenipotentiaries in 1977 to consider the draft articles onsuccession of States in respect of treaties, adopted by the International Law Com-mission in 1974,80 and to embody the results of its work in an international conventionand such other instruments as it may deem appropriate.

7'6 Official Records of the General Assembly, Thirtieth Session, Supplement No. 17(A/10017). For other relevant documents, see ibid., Annexes, agenda item 110.

77 For the proceedings of the Conference, see Official Records of the United NationsConference on the Representation of States in Their Relations with International Organizations,document A/CONF.67/18 and Add.l (United Nations publications, Sales Nos. E.75.V.11and E.75.V.12).

78 Reproduced on p. 87 of this Yearbook.79 See p. 114 of this Yearbook.8° Official Records of the General Assembly, Twenty-ninth Session, Supplement No. 10

(A/10010). For other relevant documents, see ibid., Thirtieth Session, Annexes, agendaitem 109.

60

3. QUESTION OF DIPLOMATIC ASYLUM

In accordance with General Assembly resolution 3321 (XXIX) of 14 December1974, the Secretary-General submitted to the Assembly at its thirtieth session a reporton diplomatic asylum which contained, in document A/10139 (Part I) and Add.l,the views expressed by Member States further to a request contained in the above-mentioned resolution and, in document A/10139 (Part II), an analysis of the questionof diplomatic asylum.81

In resolution 3497 (XXX) of 15 December 1975, the General Assembly expressedits thanks to the Secretary-General for his report, invited Member States wishing toexpress their views or to supplement views already expressed on the question tocommunicate those views to the Secretary-General by 31 December 1976, and decidedto give further consideration to this question at a future session of the Assembly.

4. SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON THE CHARTER OF THE UNITED NATIONS AND ON THESTRENGTHENING OF THE ROLE OF THE ORGANIZATION

Pursuant to General Assembly resolution 3349 (XXIX) of 17 December 1974,the Ad Hoc Committee on the Charter of the United Nations82 met at the UnitedNations Headquarters from 28 July to 22 August 1975 and submitted a report83 onits work to the Assembly at its thirtieth session. The Assembly considered the reportof the Ad Hoc Committee together with another item on its agenda entitled "Strength-ening of the role of the United Nations with regard to the maintenance and consol-idation of international peace and security, the development of co-operation amongall nations and the promotion of the rules of international law in relations betweenStates: reports of the Secretary-General".84

In resolution 3499 (XXX) of 15 December 1975, the General Assembly, whilereaffirming its support for the purposes and principles of the Charter, decided thatthe Ad Hoc Committee should be reconvened as the Special Committee on theCharter of the United Nations and on the Strengthening of the Role of the Organ-ization, consisting of 47 members.55 The Special Committee was instructed, inter alia,to examine the observations received from Governments concerning suggestions andproposals regarding the Charter of the United Nations and the strengthening of the

role of the Organization. It was also to consider any additional specific proposalsthat Governments might make with a view to enhancing the Organization's ability toachieve its purposes. The General Assembly requested the Secretary-General to preparefor the use of the Special Committee a study presenting analytically the viewsexpressed by Governments with respect to the various aspects of the functioning ofthe United Nations, including those relating specifically to the Charter.

5. RESPECT FOR HUMAN RIGHTS IN ARMED CONFLICTS AND PROTECTION OF JOURNALISTSENGAGED IN DANGEROUS MISSIONS IN AREAS OF ARMED CONFLICT

At its thirtieth session, the General Assembly considered the item "Respect forhuman rights in armed conflicts" together with the item "Human rights in armedconflicts: protection of journalists engaged in dangerous missions in areas of armed

81 For other relevant documents, see ibid., Thirtieth Session, Annexes, agenda item 111.82 For the membership of the Committee, see Official Records of the General Assembly,

Thirtieth Session, Supplement No. 33 (A/10033), para. 2.Ôfficial Records of the General Assembly, Thirtieth Session, Supplement No. 33

(A/10033).84 For relevant documents, see ibid., Thirtieth Session, Annexes, agenda items 29 and 113.85 For the membership of the Special Committee, see ibid., Thirtieth Session, Supplement

No. 34 (A/10034), p. 153.

61

conflict". In accordance with Assembly resolution 3319 (XXIX) of 14 December1974, the Secretary-General submitted to the Assembly at that session a report (A/10195 and Corr.l and Add.l) containing a summary of the proceedings and resultsof the second session of the Diplomatic Conference on the Reaffirmation and Develop-ment of International Humanitarian Law Applicable in Armed Conflicts, convenedby the Swiss Federal Council at Geneva from 3 February to 18 April 1975, as wellas information on relevant activities of certain non-governmental bodies. A note bythe Secretary-General (A/10147) on the protection of journalists engaged in dangerousmissions in areas of armed conflict was also circulated.86

On 15 December 1975, the General Assembly adopted resolution 3500 (XXX),in which it expressed its appreciation to the Swiss Federal Council for convokingin 1976 the third session of the Diplomatic Conference on the Reaffirmation andDevelopment of International Humanitarian Law Applicable in Armed Conflicts andto the International Committee of the Red Cross for convoking in 1976 the secondConference of Government Experts on Weapons That May Cause UnnecessarySuffering or Have Indiscriminate Effects.

The General Assembly, welcoming the substantial progress made at the secondsession of the Diplomatic Conference, called upon all parties to armed conflicts toacknowledge and to comply with their obligations under the humanitarian instrumentsand to observe the international humanitarian rules which are applicable, in particularthe Hague Conventions of 1899 and 1907,87 the Geneva Protocol of 1925s8 andthe Geneva Conventions of 1949;89 drew the attention of the Diplomatic Conferenceand of participating Governments and organizations to the need for measures topromote on a universal basis the dissemination of, and instruction in, the rules ofinternational humanitarian law applicable in armed conflicts; and urged all participantsin the Diplomatic Conference to do their utmost to reach agreements on additionalrules which might help to alleviate the suffering brought about by armed conflictsand to respect and protect non-combatants and civilian objects in such conflicts. TheAssembly also took note with appreciation of the decision of the Diplomatic Confer-ence to complete its work on the subject during its next session.

6. IMPLEMENTATION BY STATES OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE VIENNA CONVENTIONON DIPLOMATIC RELATIONS OF 1961

This item which had been included in the agenda of the twenty-ninth session ofthe General Assembly at the request of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (A/9745 )90 was not considered at that session for lack of time. At the thirtieth sessionthe General Assembly, in resolution 3501 (XXX) of 15 December 1975, reaffirmedthe need for strict implementation by States of the provisions of the Vienna Conventionon Diplomatic Relations of 196191 in the interest of maintaining normal relationsbetween them, strengthening international peace and security and developing inter-national co-operation. The Assembly also deplored instances of violations of therules of international diplomatic law and, in particular, of the provisions of theVienna Convention and invited Member States to submit to the Secretary-General

86 For other relevant documents, see ibid., Thirtieth Session, Annexes, agenda items 70and 114.

87 Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, The Hague Conventions and Declarationsof 1899 and 1907 (New York, Oxford University Press, 1915).

88 League of Nations, Treaty Series, vol. XCIV, p. 65.»9 United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 75.90 For the request and other relevant documents see Official Records of the General

Assembly, Twenty-ninth Session, Annexes, agenda item 112 and ibid., Thirtieth Session,Annexes, agenda item 115.


62

their comments and observations on ways and means to ensure the implementation ofthe provisions of the Vienna Convention, as well as on the desirability of elaboratingprovisions concerning the status of the diplomatic courier.

IX. UNITED NATIONS INSTITUTE FOR TRAINING AND RESEARCH92

As in previous years UNITAR assumed responsibility for the major part of theUnited Nations Programme of Assistance in the Teaching, Study, Dissemination andWider Appreciation of Tnternational Law established under General Assembly resolu-tion 2099 (XX) of 20 December 1965. Nineteen fellowships were awarded to youngGovernment legal advisers and teachers of international law, mostly from developingcountries. The study scheme included participation in the courses on internationallaw at The Hague Academy of International Law and in the special courses andseminars organized by UNITAR during this period.

In accordance with General Assembly resolution 2099 (XX), UNITAR alsoorganized, jointly with the Office of Legal Affairs of the United Nations Secretariat,two regional training and refresher courses in international law in Africa; the mainsubject of both courses dealt with legal aspects relating to the economic and socialdevelopment of developing countries with special reference to the African context.

UNITAR also organized a briefing/teaching seminar on the basic issues andchanging technologies relating to the Third United Nations Conference on the Lawof the Sea as well as a briefing seminar on the Review Conference of Parties to theTreaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons.

In the field of research, mention should be made of a study entitled The Waysof the Peace-Maker (UNITAR/PS/8) which deals with some of the importantproblems concerning the initiative and organization of informal intermediary assistanceby the United Nations for peaceful settlement of disputes and examines proceduralquestions such as securing the consent of the parties to the use of United Nationsassistance, the authority and effectiveness of the procedures brought to bear upona conflict situation and the comprehensiveness of solutions agreed upon for reachingsettlements on long-standing and complex disputes.

B. General review of the activities of intergovernmental organizationsrelated to the United Nations

1. INTERNATIONAL LABOUR ORGANISATION03

1. The International Labour Conference (ILC) which held its sixtieth sessionin Geneva in June 1975, adopted the following instruments: a Convention and a

92 For detailed information, see the report of the Executive Director of UNITAR tothe General Assembly, Official Records of the General Assembly, Thirtieth Session, Sup-plement No. 14 (A/10014).

93 In regard to the adoption of instruments, the preparatory work which, by virtue ofthe double-discussion procedure, normally covers a period of two years, is indicated, inorder to facilitate reference work, according to the year during which the instrument wasadopted.

63

Recommendation concerning Organisations of Rural Workers;94 a Convention and aRecommendation concerning the Development of Human Resources;95 a Conventionon Migrant Workers (complementary dispositions); and a Recommendation onMigrant Workers.96

2. The International Labour Conference (ILC) also adopted certain regulatoryamendments:

(i) Articles 48, 49, 50 and 54 of the Standing Orders of the InternationalLabour Conference were modified as a result of the entry into force of theInstrument of Amendment to the Constitution of the ILO, 1972 (Increasein the number of members of the Governing Body).97

(ii) Articles 2 (paragraph 3), 14, 55 (paragraphs 2 and 3) and 56 of theStanding Orders of the International Labour Conference, and Articles 1and 11 of the Rules concerning the Powers, Functions and Procedure ofRegional Conferences convened by the International Labour Organisationwere modified to permit the participation, as observers, of certain nationalliberation movements at meetings of the ILO.08

»* Official Bulletin, Vol. LVIII, 1976, Series A, No. 1, pp. 28-32 and 43-48, English,French, Spanish. Regarding preparatory work, see: First Discussion—Organisations of RuralWorkers and Their Role in Economic and Social Development, ILC, 59th Session (1974),Report VI (1) (this report contains, inter alia, details of the action which led to the placingof the question on the agenda of the Conference) and Report VI (2), 67 and 65 pagesrespectively, English, French, Spanish, German and Russian. See also ILC, 59th Session(1974), Record of Proceedings, pp. 447-462 and 645-650, English, French, Spanish; SecondDiscussion—Organisations of Rural Workers and Their Role in Economic and SocialDevelopment, ILC, 60th Session (1975), Report IV (1) and Report IV (2), 51 and 45pages respectively, English, French, Spanish, German, Russian. See also ILC, 60th Session(1975), Record of Proceedings, pp. 439-453, 798-800 and 801, English, French, Spanish.

95 Official Bulletin, Vol. LVIII, 1975, Series A, No. 1, pp. 32-35 and 49-69, English,French, Spanish. Regarding preparatory work, see: First Discussion—Development ofHuman Resources: Vocational Guidance and Training, ILC, 59th Session (1974), ReportVIII (1) (this report contains, inter alia, details of the action which led to the placing ofthe question on the agenda of the Conference) and Report VIII (2), 65 and 88 pagesrespectively, English, French, Spanish, German, Russian. See also ILC, 59th Session (1974),Record of Proceedings, pp. 491-515, 706-712 and 715, English, French, Spanish; SecondDiscussion—Development of Human Resources: Vocational Guidance and Training, ILC,60th Session (1975), Report VT (1) and Report VI (2), 83 and 105 pages respectively,English, French, Spanish, German, Russian. See also ILC, 60th Session (1975), Record ofProceedings, pp. 520-551, 729-735, 801 and 820-821, English, French, Spanish.

™ Official Bulletin, Vol. LVIII, 1975, Series A, No. 1, pp. 35-42 and 69-75, English,French, Spanish. Regarding preparatory work, see: First Discussion—Migrant Workers,ILC, 59th Session (1974), Report VII (1) (this report contains, inter alia, details of theaction which led to the placing of the question on the agenda of the Conference) and ReportVII (2), 78 and 93 pages respectively, English, French, Spanish, German, Russian. See alsoILC, 59th Session (1974), Record of Proceedings, pp. 569-587 and 715-726, English, French,Spanish; Second Discussion—Migrant Workers, ILC, 60th Session (1975), Report V (1)and Report V (2), 58 and 65 pages respectively, English, French, Spanish, German, Russian.See also ILC, 60th Session (1975), Record of Proceedings, pp. 637-661, 789-798, 832-835and 837-841, English, French, Spanish.

97 ILC, 60th Session, 1975, Record of Proceedings, pp. 37, 137 and 141, English, French,Spanish. The text of the Instrument of Amendment is reproduced on p. 86 of the JuridicalYearbook, 1972.

98 ILC, 60th Session, 1975, Record of Proceedings, pp. 37-39, 204-207, 234-245 and247-256, English, French, Spanish.

64

3. The Committee of Experts on the Application of Conventions and Recom-mendations met in Geneva, from 13 to 25 March 1975, and presented its Report."

4. The Governing Body Committee on Freedom of Association met in Genevaand adopted Reports 149100 and 150100 (196th session of the Governing Body,February-March 1975); Reports 151100 and 152100 (197th session, May 1975); andReports 153,10i 154101 and 156101 (198th session, November 1975).

5. Finally, mention may be made of the publication of the reports of the Fact-Finding and Conciliation Commission on Freedom of Association concerning thecase of Chile,102 and the Commission appointed under Article 26 of the Constitutionto examine the observance by Chile of the Hours of Work (Industry) Convention,1919 (No. 1), and the Discrimination (Employment and Occupation) Convention,1958 (No. 111).103

2. FOOD AND AGRICULTURE ORGANIZATIONOF THE UNITED NATIONS

I. OFFICE OF THE LEGAL COUNSEL™*

1. General constitutional and legal matters

In addition to current legal advice and services provided to the Director-Generaland various units of the Secretariat, activities related mainly to the legal matters con-sidered by the Conference and the Council (some of which were examined, in thefirst instance, by the Committee on Constitutional and Legal Matters (CCLM) at itsthirtieth and thirty-first sessions held in May/June and in October/November 1975),and by other bodies of FAO to which legal servicing was provided by the Legal Office.

The Conference adopted, at its eighteenth session held in November 1975, thefollowing resolutions or decisions of a legal nature:

—pursuant to the recommendations contained in Resolution XXII of the WorldFood Conference105 which was endorsed by the United Nations GeneralAssembly106

(a) to establish a Committee on World Food Security as a StandingCommittee of the Council by amending Article V of the Constitution and in-serting a new Rule in the General Rules of the Organization (GRO),107

"This report has been published as Report III (Part 4) to the sixtieth session (1975)of the International Labour Conference, and consists of two volumes: Vol. A: "GeneralReport and Observations concerning Particular Countries" (Report III, Part 4 A), 236pages, English, French, Spanish; and Vol. B: "General Survey of the Reports relating toConvention (No. 100) and Recommendation (No. 90) on Equal Remuneration, 1951"(Report III, Part 4 B), 89 pages, English, French, Spanish.

i°o Official Bulletin, Vol. LVIII, 1975, Series B, No. 3.1Qi These reports have been published in the Official Bulletin, Vol. LIX, 1976, Series B.102 Provisional edition, English, French, Spanish, 122 pages, excluding Annexes.103 Provisional edition, English, French, Spanish, 54 pages.104 For general information on the organization and functions of the Office of the Legal

Counsel, see Juridical Yearbook, 1972, p. 60, note 47.105 United Nations document E/5587.i°6 Resolution 3348 (XXIX).i°?C 75/REP, paras. 347-351; C 75/41; C 75/LIM/28; CL 67/REP; C 75/III/PV/l;

C 75/III/PV/6.

65

(b) to reconstitute the Intergovernmental Committee of the World FoodProgramme (IGC) as the Committee on Food Aid Policies and Programmes(FAC);108

-to amend the General Rules so that there will he an avoidance of jurisdictionalconflicts and duplication of the functions of the Committee on CommodityProblems (CCP) and the Committee on World Food Security and the Com-mittee on Food Aid Policies and Programmes;109

-to make the membership of the CCP, Committee on Fisheries (COFI), Com-mittee on Agriculture (COAG) and the Committee on Forestry (COFO)open to all Member Nations of the Organization; for this purpose, Article Vof the Constitution and Rules XXIX, XXX, XXXII, XXXIV and XXV (GRO)were amended to the effect that Member Nations can acquire membership fora biennium by simple notification which may be submitted at any time;110

-to amend Rule XXXII (GRO) to expand the terms of reference of COAG111

and to change the timing of its sessions;

-to amend Article VI-3 of the Constitution adopted at the ninth session, andparagraph 35 of the Principles relating to commissions and committees estab-lished under Article XIV of the Constitution, so as to dispense with the re-quirement of confirmation by Conference or Council of Rules of Procedureadopted by such bodies;112

-to amend the General Rules and the Financial Regulations to bring them intoline with the current practice of submitting a summary or draft Programme ofWork and Budget, and to harmonize the provisions relating to the procedurefor convening the "open" Standing Committee of the Council;113

-to amend the Financial Regulations so as to provide for the reporting by theDirector-General to the Finance Committee of budgetary transfers under theOrganization's programme-budget system;114

-to take note of the Statutory Report on Status of Conventions and Agreementsand on Amendments thereto;115

-to admit to FAO membership, by a secret ballot requiring a two-thirds majorityin accordance with Article II-2 of the Constitution and Rule XII-9 (GRO),Bahamas, Cape Verde, Grenada and Papua New Guinea;116 in the case ofSurinam, the Conference waived paragraphs 1 and 2 of Rule XIX (GRO) inorder to permit, as had been done on previous occasions, the consideration ofan application for membership received during the Conference Session;117

los C 75/REP, paras. 352-356; C 75/42; C 75/LIM/24; C 75/III/PV/l. Parallel actionwas taken by the General Assembly, which adopted a similar resolution (General Assemblyresolution 3404 (XXX)).

109 c 75/REP, paras. 306-361; C 67/REP paras. 147-149; C 75/LIM/28, C 75/III/PV/2.no C 75/REP, paras. 359 and 362-366; C 76/44; C 73/LIM/24; C 75/1II/IV/2.i» C 75/REP, paras. 367-369: C 75/36; C 75/LIM/24; C 75/III/PV/2; C 75/PV/22.«2 C 75/REP, paras. 370-73; C 75/45; C 75/I1I/PV/2.use 75/REP, paras. 376-378; C 75/LIM/28; C 75/III/PV/2; CL 67/REP, paras.

150-151.114 C 75/REP, paras. 379-380; C 75/47; C 75/LIM/24; C 76/III/PV/2.«5 C 75/43, C 75/43-Supp. 1, 18 pp.ne C 75/REP, paras. 430, 431 and 433; C 75/39; C 75/LIM/51; C 75/INF/2; C 75/

INF/9; C 75/PV/20; C 75/PV/21.i" C 75/REP, paras. 432-433.

66

—to request the FAO Council to consider the whole problem of the Constitutionand Rules of the Council;118

—to resolve that the FAO Credit Union become an integral part of FAO;119

—to authorize the Director-General to negotiate and contract loans as needed foradvancing funds to UNDP during 1975 and 1976 up to the limit of $10 million,on the understanding that the actual cost of interest incurred or foregone onloans will be reimbursed by UNDP.120

The Council, in addition to making recommendations to the Conference on theabovementioned matters, took, at its sixty-sixth, sixty-seventh and sixty-eighth sessions(the first held in June and the latter two in November 1975), decisions on the followingitems of legal interest:

—recommended new draft guidelines proposed by the CCLM, as amended, forthe formulation of Conference resolutions which should also apply, mutatismutandis, to recommendations of Regional Conferences;121

—confirmed the amendments of the Rules of Procedure of the Indo-Pacific Fish-eries Council, the Regional Fisheries Advisory Commission for the SouthwestAtlantic and the Rules of Procedure of the Fishery Committee for the EasternCentral Atlantic subject to their review by the CCLM;122

—approved the proposal regarding the establishment of a Joint FAO/ECEWorking Party on Mechanization of Agriculture and a Joint FAO/ECEWorking Party on Agrarian Structure and Farm Rationalization, and authorizedthe Director-General to draw up and promulgate, in accordance with para-graph 3 of Article VI of the Constitution and in consultation with the Execu-tive Secretary of ECE, Appropriate Statutes for the aforementioned JointWorking Parties;123

—decided to establish under Article VI-2 of the Constitution a Working Party ofselected Member Nations to study the composition arid terms of reference ofthe Council, the Programme Committee, the Finance Committee and theCCLM, and to make appropriate recommendations taking full account of theviews expressed on the matter during the Conference.124

The Legal Office was also engaged in work connected with the follow-up of therecommendations of the World Food Conference; in particular, the Legal Counselserved as Legal Adviser to the First Session of the World Food Council in June 1975.The Legal Office also provided the Secretary for the Ad Hoc Working Group on theRules and Procedures of the World Food Council. In addition, the Legal Office pro-vided advice to the Second and Third Meetings of Interested Countries on the Estab-lishment of the International Fund for Agricultural Development, and to the two

us C 75/REP, para. 357; C 75/1-Rev.l; C 75/IV/2.us C 75/REP, paras. 423-424; C 75/LIM/9; C 75/LIM/28; C 75/III/PV/4; CL 66/2,

paras. 3.285 and 3.298; CL 67/3, paras. 13-18 and Appendix B:, CL 66/REP, paras. 213-216; CL 67/REP, paras. 162-163.

120 c 75/REP, paras. 289-295; C 75/INF/23; C 75/LIM/56; C 75/LIM/56-Corr.l;C 75/11/PV/19; C 75/11/PV/20; C 75/11/PV/21; C 75/PV/23.

121 CL 66/REP, paras. 152 and 261-267 and Appendix J; C 71/REP, para. 19; CL 60/REP, paras. 188-189; CL 66/5, paras. 27-39 and Appendix A.

122 CL 66/REP, paras. 283-285; CL 66/32.123 CL 67/REP, paras. 157-161; CL 67/2, paras. 2.125, 3.216-3.219; CL 67/3,

paras. 19-20; CL 67/11; CL 67/PV/8.124 CL 68/REP, paras. 11-17; CL 68/PV/2.

67

meetings of the Ad Hoc Working Group set up at the First Meeting of InterestedCountries.

The Legal Office also participated in the drawing up of the Agreement for theEstablishment of a Regional Animal Production and Health Commission for Asia, theFar East and the South West Pacific, which came into force on 29 December 1975.

2. Environment law

Legal Office staff provided secretariat services and documentation, jointly withthe United Nations Environment Programme, for the "Intergovernmental Meetingon the Protection of the Mediterranean" held in Barcelona in January-February 1975,and for the Working Group on "Draft Legal Instruments for the Protection of theMediterranean" at its meeting in Geneva in April 1975 and thereafter; participatedin the Meeting of Experts on "International Environment Law", convened by theUnited Nations Environment Programme in Geneva in February 1975; contributedpapers and served as general rapporteur at the Conference on "International Environ-ment Law", organized by the British Institute of International and Comparative Lawin London in September 1975; participated in the WMO/UNEP Expert Meeting on"Legal Aspects of Weather Modification" in Geneva in November 1975; hosted andchaired the Workshop on "Guidelines for Environmental Legislation in DevelopingCountries" organized by the International Association of Legal Science in Rome inDecember 1975.

FAO published translations and summaries of environmental legislation ofvarious countries and references to other current national legislation in this field,125

and prepared for the Fund of the United Nations Environment Programme draftsfor a joint FAO/UNEF project to record in machine-readable form the legislativedata stored with the FAO Legal Office relating to natural resources and the humanenvironment.

Continued legislative drafting assistance was provided, within the framework ofUNDP, to the Government of Colombia for implementing regulations in connexionwith the "Code of Renewable Natural Resources and Environment Protection" pre-pared with FAO/UNEP assistance in 1974. A preliminary consultancy mission toIndonesia, Malaysia and Singapore was carried out in August 1975 with a view toformulating a technical assistance programme for the development of national envir-onmental legislation in Indonesia, and for related regional action proposals to protectthe marine environment against pollution in the Malacca/Singapore Straits area.

3. Law of the sea and international fisheries

FAO participated in the third session of the United Nations Conference on theLaw of the Sea in March-May 1975 and submitted updated versions of (i) a pub-lication on the limits and status of the territorial sea, exclusive fishing zones, fisheryconservation zones and the continental shelf, and (ii) a report on FAO, the FAOCommittee on Fisheries and international and regional fishery bodies.126

At its tenth session in June 1975, the FAO Committee on Fisheries consideredthe progress achieved by the Conference, and it requested one of its Sub-Committeesto assess the future role of FAO in fisheries, of the Committee itself and of regionalfishery bodies in the context of any new legal order that may govern fisheries. Themeeting of the Sub-Committee was scheduled for March 1976.

125 Food and Agricultural Legislation, Volume XXIV, Nos. 1 and 2.12«FAO Fisheries Circular No. 127, Rev.2, 1975, and No. 331, 1975.

68

An ad hoc Committee, set up by the Indo-Pacific Fisheries Council (IPFC) atits sixteenth session in November 1974 to review its functions and responsibilities,met in December 1975. It considered documents on (i) intergovernmental fisherybodies operating in the Indo-Pacific area and (ii) the views of IPFC member coun-tries on the area served by the IPFC, the scope of its functions and duties and itsresponsibilities with regard to fishery management.127 Considering that the IPFCshould be more involved in all aspects of fishery management and development, thead hoc Committee formulated a number of draft amendments to the 1948 Agreementestablishing the IPFC. Its report will be examined by the IPFC at its seventeenthsession in November 1976.

II. LEGISLATION BRANCH128

In addition to the spécifie activities described below, legal officers participated inthe Conference of Global Water Law Systems held in Valencia, Spain, 31 August-6 September 1975, and in the session of the Committee on the Law of InternationalWater Resources of the International Law Association, held in New Delhi, India, inJanuary 1975 and in Rome in October 1975; in the III International Symposium onGroundwater and II International Conference on Water Planning, held in Palermo,Italy, 1-5 November 1975; in the VIII Colloquium on Agrarian Law, held in Paris,6-8 November 1975; in the First International Congress of the European Food LawAssociation (EFLA), held in Parma, Italy, 26-27 September 1975, on "InternationalFood Standards and National Laws". Assistance was also given in the preparation ofdocumentation for an FAO regional workshop on forestry administration in LatinAmerica; work continued in the preparation of a draft convention for the control ofthe spread of major communicable fish diseases and a revised draft convention wascirculated to member Governments for comment.

(a) Legislative assistance and expert advice in the field—rural legislation and land administration in Togo;—water legislation and administration in Brazil, Indonesia and Oman;—fisheries legislation and administration in Argentina, Malaysia, Philippines and

United Arab Emirates;—forestry legislation in Papua New Guinea and El Salvador;

-subisidiary legislatortection in Colombia;

—Seed Law for Nepal.

(b) Legal drafting—preliminary works on technical assistance to the Dominican Republic's Gov-

ernment on agrarian and water legislation;—comments on draft groundwater use regulations in the Philippines;

—draft of Food Stock Legislation in Iran;—draft of Seed Law for Pakistan;—comments on and assistance in drafting of wildlife and national parks legis-

lation in Dominica, St. Lucia, Indonesia and Afghanistan.

—subisidiary legislation on renewable natural resources and environmental pro-tection in Colombia;

127 IPFC.AHC/75/4; IPFC.AHC/75/5.128 For general information on the organization and functions of the Legislation Branch

see Juridical Yearbook, 1972, p. 62, note 59.

69

(c) Special or comparative legal studies and reports

A number of studies and documents prepared by or in cooperation with theLegislation Branch have been issued in the course of the year, concerning, inter alia,water legislation and administration, natural resources management; joint ventures infisheries, international controls over marine pollution, and incentives in forestry.129

(d) Collection, translation and dissemination of legislative information

FAO publishes, semi-annually, the Food and Agricultural Legislation. Annotatedlists of relevant laws and regulations appear regularly in Land Reform, a semi-annualFAO publication. Similar lists are also published in the quarterly Food and NutritionReview and in Unasylva [An international journal of forestry and forest industries].

3. UNITED NATIONS EDUCATIONAL, SCIENTIFICAND CULTURAL ORGANIZATION

1. MEMBERSHIP OF THE ORGANIZATION

The Constitution of the Organization was signed on behalf of Grenada on17 February 1975. The instrument of acceptance by Grenada of the Constitutionhaving been deposited on 29 November 1974 with the Government of the UnitedKingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, Grenada became a Member Stateof the Organization on 17 February 1975, in accordance with the relevant provisionsof the Constitution.130

2. INTERNATIONAL REGULATIONS

(a) Transmission of certified copies of instruments previously adopted

In pursuance of Article 15 of the "Rules of Procedure concerning Recommenda-tions to Member States and International Conventions covered by the terms ofArticle IV, paragraph 4, of the Constitution", the Director-General transmitted toMember States certified copies of the following three Recommendations which wereadopted by the General Conference during its eighteenth session held at the Head-quarters of the Organization, Paris, from 17 October to 23 November 1974:

—Recommendation concerning education for international understanding, co-operation and peace and education relating to human rights and fundamentalfreedoms;

—Revised recommendation concerning technical and vocational education;

—Recommendation on the status of scientific researchers.

The certified copies were sent to Member States in order that they could submitthese Recommendations to their competent authorities, in accordance with Article IV,paragraph 4, of the Constitution.

Transmitted with the certified copies were copies of a "Memorandum concern-ing the obligation to submit conventions and recommendations adopted by the Gen-eral Conference to the 'competent authorities' and the submission of initial specialreports on the action taken upon these conventions and recommendations". ThisMemorandum has been prepared, upon instructions from the General Conference,

129 See the Bibliography appearing at the end of this Yearbook.130 See Articles II and XV of the Constitution.

70

by the Director-General. It contains the various provisions of the Constitution andthe regulations applicable, together with the other suggestions that the General Con-ference itself has found it necessary to formulate, at its earlier sessions, concerningthe matters indicated by the memorandum's comprehensive title.

(b) Entry into force of instruments previously adopted

(i) On 21 August 1975, the instrument of accession by Greece to the Conven-tion on Wetlands of International Importance especially as Waterfowl Habitat, doneat Ramsar, Iran, on 2 February 1971, was deposited with the Director-General.

Greece was the seventh State either to have signed the Convention without reser-vation as to ratification or to have signed it and ratified it or to have acceded to it,in accordance with the provisions of its Article 9 (2). Article 10 of this Conventionprovides that the Convention "shall enter into force four months after seven Stateshave become Parties to this Convention in accordance with paragraph 2 of Article 9"and that thereafter it "shall enter into force for each Contracting Party four monthsafter the day of its signature without reservation as to ratification, or its deposit ofan instrument of ratification or accession".

The Convention of which the Director-General is the depositary was adoptedby the International Conference on the Conservation of Wetlands and Waterfowlwhich was convened by the Imperial Government of Iran and which met in Ramsarfrom 30 January to 3 February 1971.

(ii) On 17 September 1975, the instrument of ratification by Switzerland of theConvention concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage,131

adopted at Paris on 16 November 1972 by the General Conference at its seventeenthsession, was deposited with the Director-General.

Switzerland was the twentieth State to deposit an instrument of ratification,acceptance or accession, in respect of this Convention.

Article 33 of the Convention provides that this "Convention shall enter intoforce three months after the date of the deposit of the twentieth instrument ofratification, acceptance or accession but only with respect to those States which havedeposited their respective instruments of ratification, acceptance or accession on orbefore that date" and that it "shall enter into force with respect to any other Statethree months after the deposit of its instrument of ratification, acceptance or accession".

(iii) An instrument of ratification by Mexico of the Regional Convention on theRecognition of Studies, Diplomas and Degrees in Higher Education in Latin Americaand the Caribbean, done on 19 July 1974 at Mexico City, Mexico, was depositedwith the Director-General on 14 May 1975. This was the second instrument of ratifi-cation by States deposited in respect of this Convention.

The Convention provides under its Article 17 that it "shall enter into force be-tween the States that have ratified it, one month after the deposit of the second instru-ment of ratification" and that subsequently, it "shall enter into force in respect ofeach State one month after that State has deposited its instrument of ratification oraccession".

The Convention of which the Director-General is the: depositary was adoptedby an International Conference of States which was convened by UNESCO andwhich met at Mexico City from 15 to 19 July 1974.

131 Reproduced in the Juridical Yearbook, 1972, p. 89.

71

(c) Modification of an existing instrument

On 18 June 1971 was signed in Paris, at UNESCO Headquarters, an Agreementconcerning the Latin American Faculty of Social Sciences (FLACSO).

In conformity with the terms of its Article XIV(3), this Agreement entered intoforce on 19 June 1972.

Article XIII of this Agreement provides that it can be modified by the GeneralAssembly of FLACSO by a decision taken by a two-thirds majority of the MemberStates.

In accordance with this provision, the Agreement was modified by the GeneralAssembly meeting in an extraordinary session held at Quito on 28 to 30 April 1975.

In conformity with the transitory provision of the Agreement as modified, themodification took effect on 30 April 1975.

(d) Preparation of new instruments

In implementation of decisions132 taken by the General Conference at its eight-eenth session to that effect, and in accordance with Article 10 (1) and (2) of the"Rules of Procedure concerning Recommendations to Member States and Interna-tional Conventions covered by the terms of Article IV, paragraph 4, of the Constitu-tion", the Director-General prepared and transmitted to Member States for theircomments and observations preliminary reports on the following:

—development of adult education;133

—exchange of original objects and specimens between museums in differentcountries;134

—preservation of historic quarters and historic sites within a modern environ-ment;135

—action to ensure that people at large have free, democratic access to cultureand participate actively in the cultural life of society;136

—extension of the provisions of the 1950 Agreement on the Importation ofEducational, Scientific and Cultural Materials;137

—international standardization of statistics on radio and television;138

—protection of translators.139

These reports set forth the position with regard to the problems to be regulatedand to the possible scope of the regulating action proposed in each case.

In conformity with certain decisions140 taken by the General Conference at itseighteenth session and in implementation of relevant work plans141 noted by the

132 See Resolutions 18 C/1.221, 18 C/3.424, 18 C/3.425, 18 C/3.426, 18 C/4.112 and18 C/6.13.

133 See document ED/MD/37, English, French, Russian, Spanish.134 See document SHC/MD/27, English, French, Russian, Spanish.135 See document SHC/MD/26, English, French, Russian, Spanish.136 See document SHC/MD/28, English, French, Russian, Spanish.137 See document COM/MD/34, English, French, Russian, Spanish.138 See document COM/MD/35, English, French, Russian, Spanish.139 See document LA/MD/3, English, French, Russian, Spanish.14» See Resolutions 18 C/1.322, 18 C/4.111, paragraph 6(ii) and 18 C/5.11, para-

graph (a).141 See document 18 C/5, approved, paragraphs 1443, 4010 and 5007.

72

General Conference at its same session, preparatory work was done in respect ofsome other instruments scheduled for adoption in 1976 by the General Conferenceor by an international conference of States convened by UNESCO. These concernedthe following subjects:

—international recognition of studies, diplomas and degrees in higher educationin the European States and Arab States bordering on the Mediterranean(draft convention to be adopted by an international conference of States):142

—fundamental principles on the role of the mass media in strengthening peaceand international understanding and in combating war propaganda, racismand apartheid (draft declaration to be adopted by the General Conference);143

—race and racial prejudice (Draft declaration to be adopted by the GeneralConference).

3. COPYRIGHT AND NEIGHBOURING RIGHTS

(a) Universal Copyright Convention adopted at Geneva in 7952,144

as revised at Paris on 24 July 1971

Subsequent to the entry into force of the Universal Copyright Convention asrevised at Paris in 1971, the Director-General convened the first ordinary session ofthe Intergovernmental Copyright Committee established under Article XI of theConvention, at UNESCO Headquarters on 2 and 3 June 1975. At that session, theCommittee adopted its rules of procedure, approved the list of intergovernmentaland non-governmental organizations to be invited to send observers to sessions of theCommittee and decided on the length of the terms of office of States designated asfirst members of the Committee.145

Both the 1971 Committee and the Intergovernmental Copyright Committee ofthe 1952 Universal Convention met at Geneva from 10 to 16 December 1975. Onthat occasion, the 1952 Committee took the decision to adjourn its meetings sine dieand, in the meantime, to transfer its functions to the 1971 Committee.146 Thus, whenthe 1971 Committee met, it considered a variety of items of interest to States partyto both the 1952 and 1971 texts of the Universal Convention.

(b) International Convention for the Protection of Performers,Producers of Phonograms and Broadcasting Organizations1**

At its fifth ordinary session held at Geneva on 8 and 12 December 1975, theIntergovernmental Committee, established under Article 32 of this Convention, tooknote of the steps taken since its last ordinary session toward promoting the Conven-tion, in particular the Latin American Seminar on the Rights of Performers, Producersof Phonograms and Broadcasting Organizations that was convened in Mexico from27 to 31 October 1975.148

142 See document ED-75/WS/37, English, French.i4» See documents COM-75/CONF.201/3, English, French, Russian, Spanish, and COM-

75/CONF.201/4, English, French, Russian, Spanish.144 United Nations, Treaty Scries, vol. 216, p. 132.145 Report of first session of Intergovernmental Committee, IGC ((1971 )/5.146 Report of thirteenth ordinary session of the Committee of the 1952 Convention,

IGC/XIII(1952)/2.147 United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 496, p. 43.148 Report of fifth ordinary session, ILO/UNESCO/WIPO/ICR.5/8.

73

(c) Recommendation to Member States on the Protection of Translators

Pursuant to resolution 6.13 adopted by the General Conference at its eighteenthsession, the Director-General submitted to Member States for their comments andobservations a preliminary report setting forth the position with regard to the prob-lem to be regulated and to the possible scope of the regulating action proposed, to-gether with the first draft of a recommendation on the protection of translators.149

On the basis of the comments and observations received, the Director-Generalhas prepared a final report containing a draft text of a recommendation that will beexamined by a special committee of governmental experts which is scheduled to meetat UNESCO Headquarters from 28 June to 7 July 1976. This special committeewill submit a draft which has its approval to Member States, with a view to its dis-cussion by the General Conference at its nineteenth session (1976).

(d) Desirability of adopting an international instrument on thereprographic reproduction of works protected by copyright

Sub-Committees of the Intergovernmental Copyright Committee and the Ex-ecutive Committee of the Berne Union on the reprographic 'reproduction of worksprotected by copyright met at Washington, D.C., from 16 to 21 June 1975. After athorough examination of various aspects of this subject, the Sub-Committees adoptedsimilar resolutions in which they noted that reprographic reproduction of works pro-tected by copyright is covered by those provisions of the Universal Convention andthe Berne Convention150 that concern the right of reproduction as well as the ex-ceptions to that right, and recommended that States parties to one or the other of thesaid Conventions, with a view to reconciling where necessary, the needs of the usersof reprographic reproduction with the rights and interests of the authors, seek asolution based on certain stated principles.151

(e) International Copyright Information Centre—Double taxationof copyright royalties

A Committee of Governmental Experts was convened by the Director-Generalfrom 3 to 10 November 1975 to prepare a draft international agreement to avoid thedouble taxation of copyright royalties remitted from one country to another. TheCommittee's consideration of this matter was centered mainly on three points: theadvisability of preparing an international agreement for the purpose of avoidingthe double taxation of copyright royalties; the scope of the proposed agreement; and thecriterion for determining the country of taxation.152 After a fruitful exchange ofviews on this subject, the Committee recommended, inter alia, that the Secretariat ofUNESCO prepare a preliminary draft for a multilateral convention, accompaniedby explanatory comments, and that another committee of governmental experts beconvened in 1976 in order to examine these texts.

4. HUMAN RIGHTS

At its 98th session, the Executive Board continued discussion of items 9.4,153

149 International Instrument for the Protection of Translators, LA/MD/3.150 United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 331, p. 2.7.151 For text of resolutions, see Report of Sub-Committees on Reprographic Reproduc-

tion, IGC/SC.2/8-B/EC/SC/I/8, Annex.152 Report of Committee of Governmental Experts, LA/ICIC/DT/I/6.153 See documents 97 EX/33, Arabic, English, French, Russian, Spanish; 97 EX/33

Add., Arabic, English, French, Russian, Spanish; 98 EX/38, Arabic, English, French, Rus-

74

9.5154 and 9.6155 of its agenda, items whose discussion at the Board's 97th sessionhad been deferred until its 98th session.

At this 98th session, the Board adopted decisions 98 EX/9.4, 9.5, 9.6 by whichit, inter alia, confirmed, as stated in paragraph 4 of decision 77 EX/8.3, that UNESCOis not authorized under its Constitution to take any measures in connexion withcomplaints regarding human rights, which can be entertained only in accordance withthe covenants and protocols subscribed to by Member States, and decided that itsCommittee on Conventions and Recommendations in Education shall have terms ofreference including the examination of communications addressed to UNESCO inconnexion with specific cases alleging a violation of human rights in education, scienceand culture. The Board reaffirmed that the Committee's procedure shall continue tobe that laid down in decision 77 EX/8.3, which was based on the procedure definedin resolution 728 (XXVIII) of the Economic and Social Council.

4. INTERNATIONAL CIVIL AVIATION ORGANIZATION

1. REVISION OF THE WARSAW CONVENTION (1929) AS AMENDED BY THE HAGUEPROTOCOL (1955) IN RESPECT OF AIR MAIL AND CARGO IN INTERNATIONALCARRIAGE BY AIR

The International Conference on Air Law met at Montreal from 3 to 25 Sep-tember. The purpose of the Conference was to consider, with a view to adoption,the draft articles prepared by the twenty-first session of the Legal Committee for theamendment—in respect of air mail and cargo in international carriage by air—of theWarsaw Convention of 1929 as amended by the Hague Protocol in 1955. As a resultof its deliberations, the Conference adopted and opened for signature the texts ofthe following Protocols:

(1) Additional Protocol No. 1 to Amend the Convention for the Unificationof Certain Rules Relating to International Carriage by Air Signed atWarsaw on 12 October 1929;

(2) Additional Protocol No. 2 to Amend the Convention for the Unificationof Certain Rules Relating to International Carriage by Air Signed atWarsaw on 12 October 1929 as Amended by the Protocol Done at TheHague on 28 September 1955;

(3) Additional Protocol No. 3 to Amend the Convention for the Unificationof Certain Rules Relating to International Carriage by Air Signed atWarsaw on 12 October 1929 as Amended by the Protocols done at TheHague on 28 September 1955 and at Guatemala City on 8 March 1971;and

(4) Montreal Protocol No. 4 to Amend the Convention for the Unificationof Certain Rules Relating to International Carriage by Air Signed atWarsaw on 28 October 1929 as Amended by the Protocol done at TheHague on 28 September 1955.

sian, Spanish; 98 EX/39, Arabic, English, French, Russian, Spanish; 98 EX/39 Add.,Arabic, English, French, Russian, Spanish; and 98 EX/INF.4, Arabic, English, French,Russian, Spanish.

154 See document 97 EX/34, Arabic, English, French, Russian, Spanish.155 See document 97 EX/36, Arabic, English, French, Russian, Spanish.

75

The Conference furthermore adopted in its Final Act a resolution calling forstudy of a consolidation of the instruments of the "Warsaw System" into a singleConvention in accordance with the established procedure as soon as possible. TheCouncil of ICAO considered this resolution during its 86th session in November1975 and decided to convene the meeting of the Subcommittee of the Legal Com-mittee from 17 May till 1 June 1976 for study of a consolidation of the instrumentsof the "Warsaw System" into a single Convention. At the same time the Council ofICAO convened the twenty-second session of the Legal Committee to study thissubject from 19 October to 12 November 1976.156

2. STUDY OF THE ROME CONVENTION OF 1952,157 NOISE AND SONIC BOOM

The Subcommittee of the Legal Committee met at Montreal from 8 to 22 Aprilto study the revision of the Rome Convention on Damage Caused by Foreign Aircraftto Third Parties on the Surface and to study the preparation of a new instrument onliability for damage caused by noise and sonic boom. The Subcommittee reached acertain degree of consensus on the revision of Chapters I, III, IV and V of the RomeConvention and drafted some solutions which are not seriously divergent; the problemof limits of liability remained unsolved. The Subcommittee considered that it can dono further useful work on the revision of the Rome Convention and that the mattershould be considered by the Legal Committee. On the question of liability for damagecaused by noise and sonic boom the opinions were widely divergent and it wasconsidered that without further information and data of legal, economic and technicalnature, the situation was not ripe for the drafting of a new instrument; the Subcom-mittee recommended that the problem be referred to the Legal Committee. TheCouncil noted the report of the Subcommittee during its 85th session in June 1975and States and international organizations were requested to send comments on thequestions raised in the report. The twenty-second session of the Legal Committeewhich will be held in Montreal from 19 October to 12 November 1976 will considerthis problem on the basis of the comments received.158

3. UNLAWFUL INTERFERENCE WITH INTERNATIONAL CIVIL AVIATION AND ITS FACILITIES

The Committee on Unlawful Interference with International Civil Aviation andits Facilities held 7 meetings during the year. It recommended for consideration bythe Council the reclassification of certain Recommended Practices in Annex 17(Security) to Standards, and the addition of a Recommended Practice in Chapter 9of Annex 9 (Facilitation) and of a Standard in Chapter 5 of Annex 13 (AircraftAccident Investigation). On 19 December, the Council adopted an amendment inChapter 5 of Annex 13 as recommended by the Committee.159

4. AUTHENTIC RUSSIAN TEXT OF THE CONVENTION ON INTERNATIONALCIVIL AVIATION

To implement Assembly Resolution A21-13 the Council decided on 6 June 1975to establish a Council Working Group on the authentic Russian text of the ChicagoConvention. The Working Group held two sessions in 1975. On the basis of therecommendation of the Working Group, the Council decided on 28 November 1975to convene a diplomatic conference in 1977 in conjunction with the ordinary sessionof the Assembly. The Council also considered the text of a proposed amendment tothe last paragraph of the Convention as well as a draft Russian text of the Convention

156 See Annual Report of the Council to the Assembly for 1975, Chapter VI, Section 6.157 United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 310, p. 181.158 See Annual Report of the Council to the Assembly for 1975, Chapter VI, Section 6."» Ibid., Section 7.

76

and of the amendments thereto. The draft texts have been sent to States for commentsand the Council and its Working Group will consider the matter further during 1976in the light of comments of States.160

5. ANNEXES TO THE CONVENTION ON INTERNATIONAL CIVIL AVIATION, PROCEDURESFOR AIR NAVIGATION SERVICES (PANS) REGIONAL SUPPLEMENTARY PROCEDURES(SUPPS)See "ICAO Technical Publications, Current Edition" which is published in the

ICAO Bulletin.6. DIGEST OF JUDICIAL DECISIONS

During its 84th and 86th sessions, the Council considered a proposal for theimplementation of Assembly Resolution A21-14 in which the Council was requestedto prepare a feasibility study relating to the preparation of a digest of judicial decisionsrelating to multilateral international air law conventions. The Council studied thecomments received from States and decided to postpone its decision as to what torecommend to the Assembly until additional comments will be received from Statesand the Secretary-General prepares a draft Assembly working paper showing in somedetail the form which the digest would take.161


I. CONSTITUTIONAL AND LEGAL MATTERS

1. On 26 February and 9 December 1975 respectively the Republic of Botswanaand the Comoros, already members of the United Nations, became Members of theWorld Health Organization by depositing formal instruments of acceptance of theWHO Constitution162 with the Secretary-General of the United Nations. The Kingdomof Tonga, the People's Republic of Mozambique163 and the Democratic Republic ofViet-Nam were admitted as Members of WHO by the Twenty-eighth World HealthAssembly on 14 May 1975 and deposited instruments of acceptance on 14 August,11 September and 22 October 1975 respectively, dates on which their membershipbecame effective. At the end of 1975 WHO had 146 Members and two AssociateMembers.164

2. During 1975 Bahrain and Cuba deposited instruments of acceptance of theamendment to Article 7 of the Constitution, adopted by the Eighteenth World HealthAssembly in 1965 (WHA 18.48), relating to the possible suspension or exclusion ofa Member ignoring the humanitarian principles and the 'objectives laid down in theConstitution; this brings the total number of acceptances to 52.

160 Ibid., Section 3.i»1 Ibid., Section 9.162 United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 14, p. 185 and vol. 377, p. 380.163 \yith regard to Mozambique, the World Health Assembly specified in resolution

WHA 28.3 of 14 May 1975 that the admission was to have effect from the date of attainmentof independence by Mozambique to take place on 25 June 1975. In reply to questions regardingthe legal possibility of such admission in advance, the Director-General had referred todecisions previously taken by other organizations of the United Nations system in similarcases; see Official Records of the World Health Organization, No. 227, p. 49, 65, and 321.

164 The associate membership of one of these, Southern Rhodesia, is regarded as beingin suspense. Papua New Guinea, a former Associate Member, attained independence on 16September 1975 but continues, in accordance with resolution WHA 14.45, to enjoy therights and privileges of associate membership during the transitional period which mustnecessarily elapse before the country can become a full Member.

77

3. The amendments to Articles 24 and 25 of the Constitution adopted in 1967by the Twentieth World Health Assembly (resolution \VHA 20.36), increasing themembership of the Executive Board from 24 to 30, entered into force on 21 May1975 after instruments of acceptance had been deposited by 12 further Memberssince the beginning of the year, bringing the total number of acceptances to 95 andthus meeting the requirement of acceptance by two-thirds of Members in accordancewith Article 73 of the Constitution. Noting the entry into force of this amendment,the Twenty-eighth World Health Assembly, in its resolution WHA 28.22, requestedthe Director-General to propose for the consideration of the Twenty-ninth WorldHealth Assembly draft amendments to the Constitution to permit a further marginalincrease in the membership of the Executive Board. In compliance with this mandatethe Director-General, in June 1975, transmitted to all Members of the Organizationa number of alternative drafts for a constitutional amendment which would furtherenlarge the Executive Board by one, two or three members.

4. The amendments to Articles 34 and 55 of the Constitution, which wereadopted by the Twenty-sixth World Health Assembly in 1973 (resolution WHA26.37)165 and which would permit a transition to full biennial programme-budgeting,were accepted in the course of 1975 by 42 further Members (Afghanistan, Australia,Bahrain, Benin, Bolivia, Burma, Cyprus, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, El Salvador,France, Federal Republic of Germany, Greece, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Iceland,Ireland, Kuwait, Malaysia, Maldives, Mali, Mexico, Monaco, Morocco, Netherlands,Nigeria, Norway, Panama, Portugal, Qatar, Singapore, Somalia, Spain, Swaziland,Syrian Arab Republic, Thailand, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Uganda, United Statesof America, Venezuela and Yugoslavia). By the end of the year a total of 62 instru-ments of acceptance had thus been deposited; at least 36 further instruments will benecessary in order to meet the requirements for entry into force of the amendmentsin accordance with Article 73 of the Constitution. The Twenty-eighth World HealthAssembly, in its resolution WHA 28.74, urged Members that have not yet notifiedtheir acceptance to the Secretary-General of the United Nations to do so within theshortest possible time.

II. HEALTH LEGISLATION

5. The twenty-sixth volume of the International Digest of Health Legislationwas published in 1975 together with an index covering the five years 1970-74. Thisquarterly publication continues to constitute the main vehicle for informing healthministries and public health workers of changes and developments in health legislationthroughout the world.

6. A survey of recent legislation on venereal disease control,166 also publishedin 1975, was included in the background material for the technical discussions at theTwenty-eighth World Health Assembly. Work was started on the preparation of aninternational review of mental health legislation.

7. A comparative study of legislative measures to combat smoking—an updatedversion of a document167 considered by the WHO Expert Committee on Smokingand its Effects on Health at its meeting in December 1974—was presented by WHOat the Third World Conference on Smoking and Health, held in New York inJune 1975.

8. In connexion with a large-scale project for protection of the Mediterraneanagainst pollution, WHO prepared an analysis of pertinent national legislation on water-

165 Reproduced in the Juridical Yearbook, 1973, p. 79.166 World Health Organization. Venereal disease control: a survey of recent legislation,

Geneva, 1975.167 WHO Technical Report Series, No. 568, 1975, Annex 3.

78

pollution control in the Mediterranean States, a document on relevant internationalconventions, and guidelines and associated technical annexes for a draft protocol forthe protection of the Mediterranean against pollution from land-based sources. Thiswas undertaken at the request of UNEP in preparation for an impending intergov-ernmental meeting and involved close collaboration with a number of other interna-tional bodies.

9. There is increasing reference to the Organization on matters of bioethics.In this connexion, the redrafting of the Declaration of Helsinki was extensivelydiscussed with the World Medical Association and the Council for InternationalOrganizations of Medical Sciences. A revised version of the Declaration of Helsinkiwas adopted by the Twenty-ninth World Medical Assembly in Tokyo in October. Astudy168 on the health aspects of human rights in the light of scientific and technologicaldevelopments, prepared in response to a request of the Twenty-third World HealthAssembly, was considered by the Executive Board at its fifty-fifth session. It sum-marizes briefly the main situations in which interventions, compulsions or restraintsperformed or imposed on human beings for preventive or curative therapeutic purposes,or with a view to advancing knowledge of health and disease, have implications forthe rights of the individual. The study was submitted to the thirty-first session of theUnited Nations Commission on Human Rights, held in Geneva in February-March1975.

10. Assistance was given to Algeria in reviewing proposed legislation relatingto water supply organization, including a draft water code, in the context of a generalsurvey of the water supply and sewerage sector. Malaysia received assistance inreviewing and updating its food and drug legislation.

6. WORLD BANK

INTERNATIONAL CENTRE FOR SETTLEMENT OF INVESTMENT DISPUTES (ICSID)

Signatures and ratifications of the Convention on the Settlement of InvestmentDisputes between States and Nationals of Other States

During 1975 and 1976, the Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputesbetween States and Nationals of Other States109 (hereinafter referred to as the Con-vention) was signed by Australia and Mali, and ratified by Gambia and Romania.As of August 15, 1976, 72 States had signed the Convention and 67 States haddeposited their instruments of ratification.170

Advance acceptance of the jurisdiction of the Centre

For relevant information see Juridical Yearbook, 1974, p. 76.

Submission of disputes to the Centre

For relevant information see Juridical Yearbook, 1974, p. 77.

168 World Health Organization. Health aspects of human rights with special referenceto developments in biology and medicine, Geneva, 1975, distributed by the United Nationsas document E/CN.4/1173.

169 Reproduced in the Juridical Yearbook, 1966, p. 196.170 The list |of Contracting States and Other Signatories of the Convention is reproduced

in Document ICSID/3.

79

Investment laws of the world

As indicated in the Juridical Yearbook, 1974, p. 77, the Centre's investmentlegislation project is presented in the form of a loose-leaf service. The number ofdeveloping nations parties to the Convention which are covered by the publicationnow stands at 53. Eight volumes are projected of which the first six are alreadyavailable.

Action by Contracting States pursuant to the Convention

Pursuant to Article 13 of the Convention, each Contracting State may designateup to four persons to serve on each of the two Panels maintained by the Centre, andthe Chairman of the Administrative Council may designate up to ten persons to eachPanel. States, as well as the Chairman, have made designations and the names of 142persons now appear on the Panel of Conciliators and 144 on the Panel of Arbitrators.171

Three countries have notified the Centre, pursuant to Article 25(4) of the Con-vention, of the classes of disputes they would or would not consider submitting to thejurisdiction of the Centre.1T-

There have also been further designations under Article 54(2) of the Convention(competent court or other authority to which requests for the recognition or enforce-ment of arbitral awards rendered pursuant to the Convention are to be furnished).47 States have so far notified the Centre of such designations.

7. INTERNATIONAL MONETARY FUND

The Legal Department of the International Monetary Fund participates in allactivities of the Fund that have legal implications. This participation includes legalresearch, participation in negotiations and drafting. The Department participates inthe work of the organs and committees of the Fund (the Executive Directors, theBoard of Governors, and its Interim and other Committees), as well as in meetingswith members and with various other international organizations.

The main activities of the Fund in 1975 with legal implications are describedbelow.

Reform of the international monetary system

In 1975, the Fund continued to negotiate and implement the immediate stepsof monetary reform that had been recommended in Part II of the Outline of Reform,published on June 14, 1974, by the Ad Hoc Committee of the Board of Governorson Reform of the International Monetary System and Related Issues (the "Committeeof Twenty"). Lengthy negotiations have been completed to incorporate many of theserecommendations in an amendment of the Fund's Articles of Agreement and indecisions to give effect to other recommendations. Following the issuance of the Outlineof Reform, the Committee of Twenty was succeeded by the Interim Committee of theBoard of Governors on the International Monetary System. The mandate of theInterim Committee is broader than that of its predecessor, as it includes supervisingthe management and adaptation of the international monetary system and dealing

171 A list of the members of both Panels is set forth in Document ICSID/10.172 The text of the notifications can be found in Document ICSID/10 which lists the

Contracting States and the actions taken by them pursuant to the Convention.

80

with sudden disturbances that might threaten the system, as well as considering proposalsof the Executive Directors to amend the Articles of Agreement.173 The formula forcomposition of the two committees is the same: a Minister, Governor of the Fund,or person of similar rank appointed by each constituency of members that appointsor elects an executive director. The committees consist, therefore, of 20 members.

Amendment of the Articles of Agreement

The Interim Committee, in its meetings in January, June and August, 1975, gaveguidance to the Executive Directors on a number of difficult issues arising on thedraft amendments the Executive Directors had prepared before each meeting of theInterim Committee.174

The substantive changes included in the proposed amendment range throughoutthe Articles, but can be described as involving six main themes:

(«) Exchange arrangements of each member's choice; the possible adoption ofparticular general arrangements; and the possible adoption of a systemof par values in which members will have an option to participate; subjectat all times to general obligations and firm surveillance by the Fund.

(b} A reduction in the role of gold, including the disposition of the Fund's ownholdings of gold.

(c) Changes in the characteristics and expansion of the possible uses of thespecial drawing right so as to assist it to become the principal reserve assetof the international monetary system.

(d) Simplification and expansion of the types of the Fund's financial operationsand transactions, particularly those conducted through the General Depart-ment.

(e) The possible establishment of the Council as a new organ of the Fund.

(/) Certain improvements in organizational aspects of the Fund.

The Legal Department also prepared the draft of a commentary by the ExecutiveDirectors on the extensive changes in the Articles of Agreement to be made by theamendment. The commentary is included in the Report of the Executive Directorsto the Board of Governors on the Proposed Second Amendment to the Articles ofAgreement of the International Monetary Fund.

Trust Fund and gold sales

The Interim Committee recommended on August 31, 1975 that the Fund shouldbegin to sell 50 million ounces of its gold under the powers in the present Articlesand complete this program under the amended Articles. Of that amount, 25 millionounces were to be sold directly to members in exchange for their own currencies atthe present official price equivalent to SDR 35 per ounce. The other 25 million ounceswere to be sold, and the profits used for the benefit of developing members. A portionof the profits equivalent to the ratio of a member's quota to all quotas was to be

173 United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 2, p. 39.174 Following the January 1976 meeting of the Interim Committee, at which all

remaining basic issues on amendment were agreed, the Executive Directors agreed on thetext of a proposed amendment in March 1976, and the Board of Governors approved it inApril 1976. The proposed amendment was then submitted to the Fund's 128 members foracceptance in accordance with their respective legal systems. The amendment will enterinto force for all members when three-fifths of the members with four-fifths of the totalvoting power accept it.

81

distributed directly to each developing member, and the remainder was to be usedfor loans on concessional terms to developing members with a balance of paymentsneed. The loans would be made through a Trust Fund to be administered by the Fundas Trustee. The Fund also established the Interest Subsidy Account in July 1975 toassist the members most seriously affected by the energy crisis to meet the costs ofcharges payable to the Fund in connection with transactions under the Oil Facility.

Quota increases

During 1975 the Executive Directors and the Interim Committee conductednegotiations on a general increase in the quotas of members in the Fund, and agreedon a total increase from the equivalent of SDR 29.2 billion to SDR 39 billion. Theincreases cannot become effective until after the amendment of the Articles takeseffect.175 One of the issues involved the means of payment of the subscriptions equivalentto the quota increases. Unlike previous additional subscriptions, which were paid in gold(one-fourth) and the members' own currencies (three-fourths), under the amendmentthe former "gold" portion of a subscription on this occasion will be payable, at amember's option, in its own currency or in special drawing rights and the currenciesof other members specified with their concurrence by the Fund.

The General Account

With the equivalent of SDR 4,315 million in purchases and SDR 484 million inrepurchases, the General Account in 1975 experienced a greater volume of transactionsthan in any previous year. A substantial portion of the purchases, equivalent toSDR 3,176 million, were made under the Oil Facility established in 1974.176 The OilFacility was established to assist members in balance of payments difficulty to meetthe initial impact of the increase in cost of importing petroleum and petroleumproducts. To finance the purchases under the Oil Facility the Fund borrowed a totalequivalent to SDR 6,902 million from oil-producing and other members.

The decision on the compensatory financing of export fluctuations was reviewedand revised in December 1975. The revised decision permits substantially largerpurchases than under the previous decision.

The General Arrangements to Borrow, a standing line of credit to the Fund, inaccordance with agreed terms, of approximately SDR 5.5 billion, were renewed forfive years beginning October 24, 1975. The General Arrangements to Borrow weremodified at the time of their renewal to provide for repayments of loans in specialdrawing rights and payment of interest at the same rate as is paid to the Fund forthe use of the borrowed currency.

Technical assistance

Technical assistance continued to be provided to the authorities of manymembers in the drafting of legislation and regulations relating to central banking,banking, taxation, and associated matters. Members of the Legal Department continuedto assist the Working Group on International Negotiable Instruments, especially inits consideration of a draft uniform law on international bills of exchange andpromissory notes.

175 The Board of Governors adopted a resolution, effective March 22, 1976, underwhich quotas can be increased as a result of the review. The Report of the ExecutiveDirectors to the Board of Governors is reproduced in IMF Survey, April 5, 1976.

176 The Oil Facility expired in accordance with its terms in March 1976.

82

8. WORLD METEOROLOGICAL ORGANIZATION

1. MEMBERSHIP OF THE ORGANIZATION

The following countries deposited their instrument of accession to the Con-vention of the World Meteorological Organization during 1975. The date of depositand the effective date of membership are indicated in each case, in chronologicalorder:

Date of deposit of the Date ofState instrument o1 accession membership

Oman 3 January 1975 2 February 1975(under Article 3(6)of the Convention)

Qatar 4 April 1975 4 May 1975(under Article 3(6)of the Convention)

Democratic People's 27 May 1975 26 June 1975Republic of Korea (under Article 3 (c)

of the Convention)Democratic Republic 8 July 1975 7 August 1975

of Viet Nam (under Article 3(c)of the Convention )

Cape Verde 21 October 1975 20 November 1975(under Article 3(6)of the Convention)

Papua New Guinea 15 December 1975 15 January 1976(under Article 3(6)of the Convention)

By resolution 38 (Cg-VII), the Seventh World Meteorological Congress (Geneva,28 April-23 May 1975) considered that the provisions of Article 31 of the Con-vention of the Organization regarding suspension of membership were applicable tothe Government of the Republic of South Africa and accordingly decided to suspendthis Member country from exercising its rights and enjoying privileges as a Memberof the Organization until it renounced its policy of racial discrimination and abidedby the United Nations resolutions concerning Namibia.

2. QUESTIONS RELATING TO THE CONVENTION AND THE GENERAL REGULATIONS

( 1 ) Convention

The Seventh World Meteorological Congress adopted amendments to the WMOConvention to take into account the activities of the Organization in the field ofhydrology. The parts of the Convention which were amended are the Preamble andArticles 2, 6, 7, 8, 13, 14, and 18.

The amended texts are contained in Resolution 18 (Cg-VII) adopted by Con-gress.177

(2) General Regulations

The Seventh World Meteorological Congress adopted some amendments to theGeneral Regulations of the World Meteorological Organization which were conse-quential to the amendments to the Convention referred to above.

177 Publication WMO No. 416. For the complete revised text of the Convention, seethe publication entitled "Basic Documents" (WMO-No. 15, 1975 edition).

83

Other amendments to the General Regulations which appeared necessary inthe light of experience were also adopted. Particular mention may be made of theregulation relating to the invitations to non-Member countries to send observers tosessions of constituent bodies and the inclusion of the Chinese language as an officialand working language.

The amended texts of the General Regulations are contained in Resolutions48 (Cg-VIl) and 49 (Cg-VII) adopted by Congress.178

3. AGREEMENTS AND WORKING ARRANGEMENTS

(1) Agreement of Co-operation with the Organization of African Unity (OAU)

The Seventh World Meteorological Congress (Geneva, 28 April-23 May 1975)approved the text of an Agreement of Co-operation between the World MeteorologicalOrganization and the Organization of African Unity for signature by the Secretaries-General of the two Organizations.

(2) Working Arrangements with the European Centre for Medium RangeWeather Forecasts

Under the authority given by the Executive Committee of the World Meteor-ological Organization, working relations were established, by an exchange of letters,between the World Meteorological Organization and the European Centre for MediumRange Weather Forecasts and came into force on 4 November 1975.179

(3) Agreement for Joint Financing of North Atlantic Ocean Stations

The Agreement for Joint Financing of North Atlantic Ocean Stations which wasconcluded in November 1974 and was subsequently open for signature at the Head-quarters of the World Meteorological Organization in Geneva until 31 May 1975,was signed by the following Member States without reservation: Denmark, FederalRepublic of Germany, Ireland and Tunisia, and by Finland and the United Kingdomsubject to ratification. The following Member States which had earlier signed theAgreement subject to ratification, subsequently deposited their respective instrumentsof ratification: Iceland, Netherlands, Norway and Sweden.

(4) Legal aspects of weather modification

In response to a recommendation of a meeting convened jointly by the WorldMeteorological Organization and the United Nations Environment Programme thatthe Organization should attempt to compile an inventory of national legislationrelating to weather modification, Members of the Organization were requested toprovide the texts of any laws relevant to, or which could be applied to, weathermodification activities.

9. INTERNATIONAL ATOMIC ENERGY AGENCY

1. STATUTE AND MEMBERSHIP OF THE AGENCY; ACTIONS TAKEN BY STATESIN CONNECTION WITH THE STATUTE

The Agency's membership at the end of 1975 stood at 106, no further instrumentsof acceptance having been deposited during 1975.

178 Publication WMO-No. 416. For the complete revised text of the General Regulations,see the publication entitled "Basic Documents" (WMO-No. 15, 1975 edition).

179 The texts of the correspondence will be included in a new edition of the publicationentitled "Agreements and Working Arrangements with other international organizations"(WMO-No. 60).

84

2. LEGAL ACTIVITIES

(a) Nuclear Explosions for Peaceful Purposes (PNE)

Further to the authorization given in September 1974 to the Director Generalto establish a separate unit within the Secretariat to deal with matters concerningpeaceful nuclear explosions, and after adoption towards the end of 1974 by theGeneral Assembly of the United Nations of two resolutions containing references tothe Agency's activities connected with PNE (resolution 3213 (XXIX), para. 7 andresolution 3261 D(XXIX), para. 2), the Board of Governors of the Agency adoptedon 11 June 1975 a resolution providing for the establishment of an Ad Hoc AdvisoryGroup on Nuclear Explosions for Peaceful Purposes. Under its terms of reference aslaid down in this resolutions, the Group is inter alia:

"To examine the aspects of nuclear explosions for peaceful purposes (PNE)coming within the Agency's sphere of competence, with particular reference to:

"(i) ..."(ii) Legal aspects and treaty obligations;<t »»

After establishment of the unit in January 1975, the Board of Governorsconsidered the use of PNE in February and June when it established an Ad HocAdvisory Group on Nuclear Explosions for Peaceful Purposes. This group is underthe aegis of the Board, but is open to participation by all interested States as wellPS all Members of the Agency. It deals with all aspects of PNE within the Agency'scompetence, including legal aspects and treaty obligations, and advises the Board,inter alia, on the structure and contents of the agreements that will be necessaryunder Article V of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons.180 Thelegal questions associated with PNE will be considered in 1976 in accordance with adecision taken at the Group's initial meeting in September/October 1975. TheSecretariat of the Agency was instructed to prepare a draft study on the legal aspectsof the use of PNE and the scope of the study was defined to include three mainaspects, viz. examination of existing international treaties and agreements which haveto be taken into account, examination of relevant treaties and agreements underconsideration or negotiation and identification of legal instruments to be developedfor provision of PNE—related services and formulation of an outline of the structureand contents of agreement(s) required.

(b) Review Conference of the Parties to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferationof Nuclear Weapons (Geneva, 5-30 May 1975)

The Agency was represented at the Review Conference of the Parties to theTreaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons to which it submitted reportson its safeguards work, on its work in connection with PNE and, in relation toArticle IV of the Treaty, on the provision of technical assistance and related activities.The Conference also stated that it considered the Agency to be the appropriateinternational body referred to in Article V of the Treaty through which potentialbenefits from peaceful applications of nuclear explosion could be made available toany non-nuclear-weapon State, and urged that common export requirements relatingto safeguards be strengthened, in particular by extending Ihe application of safeguardsto all peaceful nuclear activities in importing States not Party to the Treaty.181

180 Reproduced in the Juridical Yearbook, 1968, p. 156.181 For the proceedings of the Conference, see documents NPT/CONF/35/1, NPT/

CONF/35/II and NPT/CONF/35/III.

85

(c) Safeguards Agreements outside the framework of the Non-Prolifération Treaty

Steps have been taken to clarify the scope and duration of safeguards agreementsconcluded outside the framework of the Non-Proliferation Treaty. These clarificationsare being reflected in new agreements. Consideration is also being given to theelaboration of standard agreements for States that are not party to the Treaty butwish to arrange for the application of safeguards to all nuclear imports or to certaincategories of such imports.

(d) Regional Nuclear Fuel Cycle Centers—Study Project

Following a report by the Director General at the eighteenth regular session ofthe General Conference in 1975 that the Agency's Market Survey for Nuclear Powerin Developing Countries showed that nuclear power is now attractive on economicgrounds to about 40 developing countries and should account for more than halfof the capacity additions in these countries during the next decade, a paper on sucha study project was elaborated by the Agency and a Consultants' meeting on legaland institutional aspects scheduled for 1976.

(e) Training courses and advisory services on regulatory matters

In response to the urgent needs for qualified personnel in many developingcountries about to undertake their first nuclear power programmes, the Agencyorganized an Interregional Training Course on Nuclear Power Project Planningand Implementation at the Nuclear Research Centre, Karlsruhe, from September toDecember 1975. The course which was held in co-operation with the Government ofthe Federal Republic of Germany and with the financial support of the United NationsDevelopment Programme, was attended by 36 participants from 20 countries. Thesyllabus of this training programme focuses on the management, administrative,technical and economic aspects of preconstruction planning and post-planningimplementation stages, including the legislative framework and regulatory requirementsfor the introduction of nuclear power. This was the first in a series of training coursesscheduled by the Agency for the period 1975-1977. Reference is made to suchtraining courses in resolution 3386 (XXX), adopted by the General Assembly on 12November 1975 in relation to the report of the IAEA and in which the GeneralAssembly "notes with appreciation the increased and continuing emphasis which theIAEA places in its technical assistance programme on the introduction of nuclearpower and its technology in developing countries for the peaceful needs of thesecountries, in particular the series of training courses on nuclear power project planningand implementation".

In conjunction with the implementation of the first nuclear power projects inMexico and Yugoslavia, the Agency provided advisory services on legal and regulatorymatters to the national authorities concerned in the course of 1975. It also assistedthe Government of Malaysia in the framing of legislation for the control of theproduction, application and use of atomic energy.

86

Chapter IV

TREATIES CONCERNING INTERNATIONAL LAW CONCLUDED UNDERTHE AUSPICES OF THE UNITED NATIONS AND RELATED INTER-GOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS

Treaties concerning international law concluded under the auspicesof the United Nations

UNITED NATIONS CONFERENCE ON THE REPRESENTATION OFSTATES IN THEIR RELATIONS WITH INTERNATIONAL ORGAN-IZATIONS

(a) VIENNA CONVENTION ON THE REPRESENTATION OF STATES IN THEIR RELATIONSWITH INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS OF A UNIVERSAL CHARACTER. DONE ATVIENNA ON 14 MARCH 1975

The States Parties to the present Convention,

Recognizing the increasingly important role of multilateral diplomacy in relationsbetween States and the responsibilities of the United Nations, its specialized agenciesand other international organizations of a universal character within the internationalcommunity,

Having in mind the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nationsconcerning the sovereign equality of States, the maintenance of international peaceand security and the promotion of friendly relations and co-operation among States,

Recalling the work of codification and progressive development of internationallaw applicable to bilateral relations between States which was achieved by the ViennaConvention on Diplomatic Relations of 1961, the Vienna Convention on ConsulatRelations of 1963, and the Convention on Special Missions of 1969,

Believing that an international convention on the representation of States intheir relations with international organizations of a universal character would con-tribute to the promotion of friendly relations and co-operation among States, irre-spective of their political, economic and social systems,

Recalling the provisions of Article 105 of the Charter of the United Nations,Recognizing that the purpose of privileges and immunities contained in the

present Convention is not to benefit individuals but to ensure the efficient performanceof their functions in connexion with organizations and conferences,

Taking account of the Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of theUnited Nations of 1946, the Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of theSpecialized Agencies of 1947 and other agreements in force between States andbetween States and international organizations,

Affirming that the rules of customary international law continue to govern questionsnot expressly regulated by the provisions of the present Convention,

87

Have agreed as follows:PART I

INTRODUCTION

Article 1

Use of terms

1. For the purposes of the present Convention:

(1) "international organization" means an intergovernmental organization;

(2) "international organization of a universal character'' means the UnitedNations, its specialized agencies, the International Atomic EnergyAgency and any similar organization whose membership and respon-sibilities are on a world-wide scale;

(3) ''Organization'' means the international organization in question;

(4) ''organ'' means:(a) any principal or subsidiary organ of an international organ-

ization, or(b) any commission, committee or sub-group of any such organ,

in which States are members;

(5) "conference" means a conference of States convened by or under theauspices of an international organization;

(6) "mission" means, as the case may be, the permanent mission or thepermanent observer mission;

(7) "permanent mission" means a mission of permanent character, rep-resenting the State, sent by a State member of an international organ-ization to the Organization;

(8) "permanent observer mission" means a mission of permanent character,representing the State, sent to an international organization by aState not a member of the Organization;

(9) "delegation" means, as the case may be, the delegation to an organor the delegation to a conference;

(10) "delegation to an organ" means the delegation sent by a State toparticipate on its behalf in the proceedings of the organ;

(11) "delegation to a conference" means the delegation sent by a Stateto participate on its behalf in the conference;

(12) "observer delegation" means, as the case may be, the observerdelegation to an organ or the observer delegation to a conference;

(13) "observer delegation to an organ" means the delegation sent by aState to participate on its behalf as an observer in the proceedingsof the organ;

(14) "observer delegation to a conference" means the delegation sent bya State to participate on its behalf as an observer in the proceedingsof the conference;

(15) "host State" means the State in whose territory:(a) the Organization has its seat or an office, or(b) a meeting of an organ or a conference is held;

88

(16) "sending State" means the State which sends:

(a) a mission to the Organization at its seat or to an office of theOrganization, or

(£) a delegation to an organ or delegation to a conference, or

(c) an observer delegation to an organ or an observer delegationto a conference;

(17) "head of mission" means, as the case may be, the permanent rep-resentative or the permanent observer;

(18) "permanent representative" means the person charged by the sendingState with the duty of acting as the head of the permanent mission;

(19) "permanent observer" means the person charged by the sendingState with the duty of acting as the head of the permanent observermission;

(20) "members of the mission" means the head of mission and the mem-bers of the staff;

(21) "head of delegation" means the delegate charged by the sendingState with the duty of acting in that capacity;

(22) "delegate" means any persons designated by a State to participateas its representative in the proceedings of an organ or in a con-ference;

(23) "members of the delegation" means the delegates and the membersof the staff;

(24) "head of the observer delegation" means the observer delegatecharged by the sending State with the duty of acting in that capacity;

(25) "observer delegate" means any person designated by a State to attendas an observer the proceeding of an organ or of a conference;

(26) "members of the observer delegation" means the observer delegatesand the members of the staff;

(27) "members of the staff" means the members of the diplomatic staff,the administrative and technical staff and the service staff of themission, the delegation or the observer delegation;

(28) "members of the diplomatic staff" means the members of the staff ofthe mission, the delegation or the observer delegation who enjoydiplomatic status for the purpose of the mission, the delegation orthe observer delegation;

(29) "members of the administrative and technical staff" means the mem-bers of the staff employed in the administrative and technical serviceof the mission, the delegation or the observer delegation;

(30) "members of the service staff" means the members of the staffemployed by the mission, the delegation or the observer delegationas household workers or for similar tasks;

(31) "private staff" means persons employed exclusively in the privateservice of the members of the mission or the delegation;

(32) "premises of the mission" means the buildings or parts of buildingsand the land ancillary thereto, irrespective of ownership, used for

89

the purpose of the mission, including the residence of the head ofmission;

(33) "premises of the delegation" means the buildings or parts of buildings,irrespective of ownership, used solely as the offices of the delegation;

(34) "rules of the Organization" means, in particular, the constituentinstruments, relevant decisions and resolutions, and established practiceof the Organization.

2. The provisions of paragraph 1 of this article regarding the use of terms inthe present Convention are without prejudice to the use of those terms or to themeanings which may be given to them in other international instruments or theinternal law of any State.

Article 2

Scope of the present Convention

1. The present Convention applies to the representation of States in their rela-tions with any international organization of a universal character, and to their'repre-sentation at conferences convened by or under the auspices of such an organization,when the Convention has been accepted by the host State and the Organization hascompleted the procedure envisaged by article 90.

2. The fact that the present Convention does not apply to other internationalorganizations is without prejudice to the application to the representation of Statesin their relations with such other organizations of any of the rules set forth in theConvention which would be applicable under international law independently of theConvention.

3. The fact that the present Convention does not apply to other conferences iswithout prejudice to the application to the representation of States at such otherconferences of any of the rules set forth in the Convention which would be applicableunder international law independently of the Convention.

4. Nothing in the present Convention shall preclude the conclusion of agree-ments between States or between States and international organizations making theConvention applicable in whole or in part to international organizations or conferencesother than those referred to in paragraph 1 of this article.

Article 3

Relationship between the present Convention and the relevant rulesof international organizations or conferences

The provisions of the present Convention are without prejudice to any relevantrules of the Organization or to any relevant rules of procedure of the conference.

Article 4

Relationship between the present Conventionand other international agreements

The provisions of the present Convention

(a) are without prejudice to other international agreements in force betweenStates or between States and international organizations of a universal char-acter, and

(b) shall not preclude the conclusion of other international agreements regard-ing the representation of States in their relations with international organ-

90

izations of a universal character or their representation at conferencesconvened by or under the auspices of such organizations.

PART IIMISSIONS TO INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS

Article 5

Establishment of missions

1. Member States may, if the rules of the Organization so permit, establishpermanent missions for the performance of the functions mentioned in article 6.

2. Non-member States may, if the rules of the Organization so permit, establishpermanent observer missions for the performance of the functions mentioned inarticle 7.

3. The Organization shall notify the host State of the institution of a missionprior to its establishment.

Article 6

Functions of the permanent mission

The functions of the permanent mission consist inter alia in:

(a) ensuring the representation of the sending State to the Organization;

(b) maintaining liaison between the sending State and the Organization;(c) negotiating with and within the Organization;

(d) ascertaining activities in the Organization and reporting thereon to theGovernment of the sending State;

(e) ensuring the participation of the sending State in the activities of the Organ-ization;

(/) protecting the interests of the sending State in relation to the Organization;

(g) promoting the realization of the purposes and principles of the Organiza-tion by co-operating with and within the Organization.

Article 7

Functions of the permanent observer mission

The functions of the permanent observer mission consist inter alia in:

(a) ensuring the representation of the sending State and safeguarding its inter-ests in relation to the Organization and maintaining liaison with it;

(b) ascertaining activities in the Organization and reporting thereon to theGovernment of the sending State;

(c) promoting co-operation with the Organization and negotiating with it.

Article 8

Multiple accreditation or appointment

I . The sending State may accredit the same person as head of mission to twoor more international organizations or appoint a head of mission as a member of thediplomatic staff of another of its missions.

91

2. The sending State may accredit a member of the diplomatic staff of themission as head of mission to other international organizations or appoint a memberof the staff of the mission as a member of the staff of another of its missions.

3. Two or more States may accredit the same person as head of mission to thesame international organization.

Article 9

Appointment of the members of the mission

Subject to the provisions of articles 14 and 73, the sending State may freelyappoint the members of the mission.

Article 10

Credentials of the head of mission

The credentials of the head of mission shall be issued by the Head of State, bythe Head of Government, by the Minister for Foreign Affairs or, if the rules of theOrganization so permit, by another competent authority of the sending State and shallbe transmitted to the Organization.

Article 11

Accreditation to organs of the Organization

1. A member State may specify in the credentials issued to its permanent repre-sentative that he is authorized to act as a delegate to one or more organs of theOrganization.

2. Unless a member State provides otherwise its permanent representative mayact as a delegate to organs of the Organization for which there are no special require-ments as regards representation.

3. A non-member State may specify in the credentials issued to its permanentobserver that he is authorized to act as an observer delegate to one or more organsof the Organization when this is permitted by the rules of the Organization or theorgan concerned.

Article 12

Full powers for the conclusion of a treaty with the Organization

1. The head of mission, by virtue of his functions and without having to pro-duce full poyers, is considered as representing his State for the purpose of adopting thetext of a treaty between that State and the Organization.

2. The head of mission is not considered by virtue of his functions as represent-ing his State for the purpose of signing a treaty, or signing a treaty ad referendum,between that State and the Organization unless it appears from the practice of theOrganization, or from other circunmstances, that the intention of the parties was todispense with full powers.

Article 13

Composition of the mission

In addition to the head of mission, the mission may include diplomatic staff,administrative and technical staff and service staff.

92

Article 14

Size of the mission

The size of the mission shall not exceed what is reasonable and normal, havingregard to the functions of the Organization, the needs of the particular mission andthe circumstances and conditions in the host State.

Article 15

Notifications

1. The sending State shall notify the Organization of:

(a) the appointment, position, title and order of precedence of the members ofthe mission, their arrival, their final departure or the termination of theirfunctions with the mission, and any other changes affecting their statusthat may occur in the course of their service with the mission;

(b) the arrival and final departure of any person belonging to the family ofa member of the mission and forming part of his household and, whereappropriate, the fact that a person becomes or ceases to be such a memberof the family;

(c) the arrival and final departure of persons employed on the private staffof members of the mission and the termination of their employment assuch;

(d) the beginning and the termination of the employment of persons residentin the host State as members of the staff of the mission or as persons em-ployed on the private staff;

(e) the location of the premises of the mission and of the private residencesenjoying inviolability under articles 23 and 29, as well as any other inform-ation that may be necessary to identify such premises and residences.

2. Where possible, prior notification of arrival and final departure shall also begiven.

3. The Organization shall transmit to the host State the notifications referredto in paragraphs 1 and 2 of this article.

4. The sending State may also transmit to the host State the notificationsreferred to in paragraphs 1 and 2 of this article.

Article 16

Acting head of mission

If the post of head of mission is vacant, or if the head if mission is unable toperform his functions, the sending State may appoint an acting head of mission whosename shall be notified to the Organization and by it to the host State.

Article 17

Precedence

1. Precedence among permanent representatives shall be determined by thealphabetical order of the names of the States used in the Organization.

2. Precedence among permanent observers shall be determined by the alpha-betical order of the names of the States used in the Organization.

93

Article 18

Location of the mission

Missions should be established in the locality where the Organization has itsseat. However, if the rules of the Organization so permit and with the prior consentof the host State, the sending State may establish a mission or an office of a missionin a locality other than that in which the Organization has its seat.

Article 19

Use of flag and emblem

1. The Mission shall have the right to use the flag and emblem of the sendingState on its premises. The head of mission shall have the same right as regards hisresidence and means of transport.

2. In the exercise of the right accorded by this article regard shall be had tothe laws, regulations and usages of the host State.

Article 20

General facilities

1. The host State shall accord to the mission all necessary facilities for theperformance of its functions.

2. The Organization shall assist the mission in obtaining those facilities andshall accord to the mission such facilities as lie within its own competence.

Article 21

Premises and accomodation

1. The host State and the Organization shall assist the sending State in obtainingon reasonable terms premises necessary for the mission in the territory of the hostState. Where necessary, the host State shall facilitate in accordance with its laws theacquisition of such premises.

2. Where necessary, the host State and the Organization shall also assist themission in obtaining on reasonable terms suitable accommodation for its members.

Article 22

Assistance by the Organization in respect of privileges and immunities

1. The Organization shall, where necessary, assist the sending State, its missionand the members of its mission in securing the enjoyment of the privileges and immu-nities provided for under the present Convention.

2. The Organization shall, where necessary, assist the host State in securing thedischarge of the obligations of the sending State, its mission and the members of itsmission in respect of the privileges and immunities provided for under the presentConvention.

Article 23

Inviolability of premises

1. The premises of the mission shall be inviolable. The agents of the host Statemay not enter them, except with the consent of the head of mission.

2. (a) The host State is under a special duty to take all appropriate steps toprotect the premises of the mission against any instrusion or damage

94

and to prevent any disturbance of the peace of the mission or impair-ment of its dignity.

(6) In case of an attack on the premises of the mission, the host State shalltake all appropriate steps to prosecute and punish persons who havecommitted the attack.

3. The premises of the mission, their furnishings and other property thereonand the means of transport of the mission shall be immune from search, requisition,attachment or execution.

Article 24

Exemption of the premises from taxation

1. The premises of the mission of which the sending State or any person actingon its behalf is the owner or the lessee shall be exempt from all national, regional ormunicipal dues and taxes other than such as represent payment for specific servicesrendered.

2. The exemption from taxation referred to in this article shall not apply tosuch dues and taxes payable under the law of the host State by persons contractingwith the sending State or with any person acting on its behalf.

Article 25

Inviolability of archives and documents

The archives and documents of the mission shall be inviolable at all times andwherever they may be.

Article 26

Freedom of movement

Subject to its laws and regulations concerning zones entry into which is prohibitedor regulated for reasons of national security, the host State shall ensure freedom ofmovement and travel in its territory to its members of the mission and members oftheir families forming part of their households.

Article 27

Freedom of communication

1. The host State shall permit and protect free communication on the part ofthe mission for all official purposes. In communicating with the Government of thesending State, its permanent diplomatic missions, consular posts, permanent missions,permanent observer missions, special missions, delegations arid observer delegations,wherever situated, the mission may employ all appropriate means, including couriersand messages in code or cipher. However, the mission may install and use a wirelesstransmitter only with the consent of the host State.

2. The official correspondence of the mission shall be inviolable. Official corres-pondence means all correspondence relating to the mission and its functions.

3. The bags of the mission shall not be opened or detained.4. The packages constituting the bag of the mission must bear visible external

marks of their character and may contain only documents or articles intended forthe official use of the mission.

5. The courier of the mission, who shall be provided with an official documentindicating his status and the number of packages constituting the bag, shall be pro-

95

tected by the host State in the performance of his functions. He shall enjoy personalinviolability and shall not be liable to any form of arrest or detention.

6. The sending State or the mission may designate couriers ad hoc of the mission.In such cases the provisions of paragraph 5 of this article shall also apply, except thatthe immunities therein mentioned shall cease to apply when the courier ad hoc hasdelivered to the consignee the mission's bag in his charge.

7. The bag of the mission may be entrusted to the captain of a ship or of acommercial aircraft scheduled to land at an authorized port of entry. He shall beprovided with an official document indicating the number of packages constituting thebag, but he shall not be considered to be a courier of the mission. By arrangementwith the appropriate authorities of the host State, the mission may send one of itsmembers to take possession of the bag directly and freely from the captain of theship or of the aircraft.

Article 28

Personal inviolability

The persons of the head of mission and of the members of the diplomatic staffof the mission shall be inviolable. They shall not be liable to any form of arrest ordetention. The host State shall treat them with due respect and shall take all appro-priate steps to prevent any attack on their persons, freedom or dignity and to prosecuteand punish persons who have committed such attacks.

Article 29

Inviolability of residence and property

1. The private residence of the head of mission and of the members of thediplomatic staff of the mission shall enjoy the same inviolability and protection asthe premises of the mission.

2. The papers, correspondence and, except as provided in paragraph 2 of ar-ticle 30, the property of the head of mission or of members of the diplomatic staffof the mission shall also enjoy inviolability.

Article 30

Immunity from jurisdiction

1. The head of mission and the members of the diplomatic staff of the missionshall enjoy immunity from criminal jurisdiction of the host State. They shall also enjoyimmunity from its civil and administrative jurisdiction, except in the case of:

(a) a real action relating to private immovable property situated in the territoryof the host State, unless the person in question holds it on behalf of thesending State for the purposes of the mission;

(b) an action relating to succession in which the person in question is involvedas executor, administrator, heir or legatee as a private person and not onbehalf of the sending State;

(c) an action relating to any professional or commercial activity exercised bythe person in question in the host State outside his official functions.

2. No measures of execution may be taken in respect of the head of missionor a member of the diplomatic staff of the mission except in cases coming undersubparagraphs (a), (b) and (c) of paragraph 1 of this article, and provided that themeasures concerned can be taken without infringing the inviolability of his personor of his residence.

96

3. The head of mission and the members of the diplomatic staff of the missionare not obliged to give evidence as witnesses.

4. The immunity of the head of mission or of a member of the diplomaticstaff of the mission from the jurisdiction of the host State does not exempt him fromthe jurisdiction of the sending State.

Article 31

Waiver of immunity

1. The immunity from jurisdiction of the head of mission and members of thediplomatic staff of the mission and of persons enjoying immunity under article 36may be waived by the sending State.

2. Waiver must always be express.3. The initiation of proceedings by any of the persons referred to in paragraph 1

of this article shall preclude him from invoking immunity from jurisdiction in respectof any counter-claim directly connected with the principal claim.

4. Waiver of immunity from jurisdiction in respect of civil or administrativeproceedings shall not be held to imply waiver of immunity in respect of the executionof the judgement, for which a separate waiver shall be necessary.

5. If the sending State does not waive the immunity of any of the personsmentioned in paragraph 1 of this article in respect of a civil action, it shall use itsbest endeavours to bring about a just settlement of the case.

Article 32

Exemption from social security legislation

1. Subject to the provisions of paragraph 3 of this article, the head of missionand the members of the diplomatic staff of the mission shall with respect to servicesrendered for the sending State be exempt from social security provisions which may

be in force in the host State.2. The exemption provided for in paragraph 1 of this article shall also apply

to persons who are in the sole private employ of the head of mission or of a memberof the diplomatic staff of the mission, on condition:

(a) that such employed persons are not nationals of or permanently residentin the host State; and

(è) that they are covered by the social security provisions which may be inforce in the sending State or a third State.

3. The head of mission and the members of the diplomatic staff of the missionwho employ persons to whom the exemption provided for in paragraph 2 of this articledoes not apply shall observe the obligations which the social security provisions ofthe host State impose upon employers.

4. The exemption provided for in paragraphs 1 and 2 of this article shall notpreclude voluntary participation in the social security system of the host State providedthat such participation is permitted by that State.

5. The provisions of this article shall not affect bilateral or multilateral agree-ments concerning security concluded previously and shall not prevent the conclusionof such agreements in the future.

97

Article 33

Exemption from dues and taxes

The head of mission and the members of the diplomatie staff of the missionshall be exempt from all dues and taxes, personal or real, national, regional or muni-cipal, except:

(a) indirect taxes of a kind which are normally incorporated in the price ofgoods or services;

(6) dues and taxes on private immovable property situated in the territory ofthe host State, unless the person concerned holds it on behalf of the sendingState for the purposes of the mission;

(c) estate, succession or inheritance duties levied by the host State, subject tothe provisions of paragraph 4 of article 38;

(d) dues and taxes on private income having its source in the host State andcapital taxes on investments made in commercial undertakings in the hostState;

(e) charges levied for specific services rendered;(/) registration, court or record fees, mortgage dues and stamp duty, with

respect to immovable property, subject to the provisions of article 24.

Article 34

Exemption from personal services

The host State shall exempt the head of mission and the members of the diplo-matic staff of the mission from all personal services, from all public service of anykind whatsoever, and from military obligations such as those connected with requisi-tioning, military contributions and billeting.

Article 35

Exemption from customs duties and inspection

1. The host State shall, in accordance with such laws and regulations as it mayadopt, permit entry of and grant exemption from all customs duties, taxes and relatedcharges other than charges for storage, cartage and similar services, on:

(a) articles for the official use of the mission;

(b) articles for the personal use of the head of mission or a member of thediplomatic staff of the mission, including articles intended for his estab-lishment.

2. The personal baggage of the head of mission or a member of the diplomaticstaff of the mission shall be exempt from inspection, unless there are serious groundsfor presuming that it contains articles not covered by the exemptions mentioned inparagraph 1 of this article, or articles the import or export of which is prohibitedby the law or controlled by the quarantine regulations of the host State. In such cases,inspection shall be conducted only in the presence of the person enjoying the exemptionor of his authorized representative.

Article 36

Privileges and immunities of other persons

1. The members of the family of the head of mission forming part of his house-hold and the members of the family of a member of the diplomatic staff of the

98

mission forming part of his household shall, if they are not nationals of or permanentlyresident in the host State, enjoy the privileges and immunities specified in articles 28,29, 30, 32, 33, 34 and in paragraphs 1(6) and 2 of article 35.

2. Members of the administrative and technical staff of the; mission, together withmembers of their families forming part of their respective households who are notnationals of or permanently resident in the host State, shall enjoy the privileges andimmunities specified in articles 28, 29, 30, 32, 33 and 34, except that the immunityfrom civil and administrative jurisdiction of the host State specified in paragraph 1of article 30 shall not extend to acts performed outside the course of their duties.They shall also enjoy the privileges specified in paragraph 1(6) of article 35 in respectof articles imported at the time of first installation.

3. Members of the service staff of the mission who are not nationals of orpermanently resident in the host State shall enjoy immunity in respect of acts per-formed in the course of their duties, exemption from dues and taxes on the emolu-ments they receive by reason of their employment and the exemption specified inarticle 32.

4. Private staff of members of the mission shall, if they are not nationals of orpermanently resident in the host State, be exempt from dues arid taxes on the emolu-ments they receive by reason of their employment. In other respects, they may enjoyprivileges and immunities only to the extent admitted by the host State. However, thehost State must exercise its jurisdiction over those persons in such a manner as notto interfere unduly with the performance of the functions of the mission.

Article 37

Nationals and permanent residents of the host State

1. Except in so far as additional privileges and immunities may be granted byby the host State, the head of mission or any member of the diplomatic staff of themission who is a national of or permanently resident in that State shall enjoy onlyimmunity from jurisdiction and inviolability in respect of official acts performed inthe exercise of his functions.

2. Other members of the staff of the mission who are nationals of or permanentlyresident in the host State shall enjoy only immunity from jurisdiction in respect ofofficial acts performed in the exercise of their functions. In all other respects, thosemembers, and persons on the private staff who are nationals of or permanently residentin the host State, shall enjoy privileges and immunities only to the extent admittedby the host State. However, the host State must exercise its jurisdiction over thosemembers and persons in such a manner as not to interfere unduly with the perform-ance of the functions of the mission.

Article 38

Duration of privileges and immunities

1. Every person entitled to privileges and immunities shall enjoy them from themoment he enters the territory of the host State on proceeding to take up his post or,if already in its territory, from the moment when his appointment is notified to thehost State by the Organization or by the sending State.

2. When the functions of a person enjoying privileges and immunities have cometo an end, such privileges and immunities shall normally cease at the moment whenhe leaves the territory, or on the expiry of a reasonable period in which to do so. How-ever, with respect to acts performed by such a person in the exercise of his functionsas a member of the mission, immunity shall continue to subsist.

99

3. In the event of the death of a member of the mission, the members of hisfamily shall continue to enjoy the privileges and immunities to which they are entitleduntil the expiry of a reasonable period in which to leave the territory.

4. In the event of the death of a member of the mission not a national of orpermanently resident in the host State or of a member of his family forming partof his household, the host State shall permit the withdrawal of the movable propertyof the deceased, with the exception of any property acquired in the territory theexport of which was prohibited at the time of his death. Estate, succession and in-heritance duties shall not be levied on movable property which is in the host Statesolely because of the presence there of the deceased as a member of the mission orof the family of a member of the mission.

Article 39

Professional or commercial activity

1. The head of mission and members of the diplomatic staff of the mission shallnot practise for personal profit any professional or commercial activity in the hostState.

2. Except in so far as such privileges and immunities may be granted by thehost State, members of the administrative and technical staff and persons formingpart of the household of a member of the mission shall not, when they practise aprofessional or commercial activity for personal profit, enjoy any privilege or immunityin respect of acts performed in the course of or in connexion with the practice ofsuch activity.

Article 40

End of functions

The functions of the head of mission or of a member of the diplomatic staffof the mission shall come to an end, inter alia:

(a) on notification of their termination by the sending State to the Organization;(è) if the mission is finally or temporarily recalled.

Article 41

Protection of premises, property and archives

1. When the mission is temporarily or finally recalled, the host State mustrespect and protect the premises, property and archives of the mission. The sendingState must take all appropriate measures to terminate this special duty of the hostState as soon as possible. It may entrust custody of the premises, property and archivesof the mission to the Organization if it so agrees, or to a third State acceptable tothe host State.

2. The host State, if requested by the sending State, shall grant the latter facil-ities for removing the property and archives of the mission from the territory of thehost State.

PART III

DELEGATIONS TO ORGANS AND TO CONFERENCES

Article 42

Sending of delegations

1. A State may send a delegation to an organ or to a conference in accordancewith the rules of the Organization.

100

2. Two or more States may send the same delegation to an organ or to a con-ference in accordance with the rules of the Organization.

Article 43

Appointment of the members of the delegation

Subject to the provisions of articles 46 and 73, the sending State may freelyappoint the members of the delegation.

Article 44

Credentials of delegates

The credentials of the head of delegation and of other delegates shall be issuedby the Head of State, by the Head of Government, by the Minister for ForeignAffairs or, if the rules of the Organization or the rules of procedure of the con-ference so permit, by another competent authority of the sending State. They shallbe transmitted, as the case may be, to the Organization or to the conference.

Article 45

Composition of the delegation

In addition to the head of delegation, the delegation may include other delegates,diplomatic staff, administrative and technical staff and service staff.

Article 46

Size of the delegation

The size of the delegation shall not exceed what is reasonable and normal,having regard, as the case may be, to the functions of the organ or the object ofthe conference, as well as the needs of the particular delegation and the circumstancesand conditions in the host State.

Article 47

Notifications

1. The sending State shall notify the Organization or, as the case may be, theconference of:

(a) the composition of the delegation, including the position, title and orderof precedence of the members of the delegation, and any subsequentchanges therein;

(b) the arrival and final departure of members of the delegation and thetermination of their functions with the delegation;

(c) the arrival and final departure of any person accompanying a memberof the delegation;

(d) the beginning and the termination of the employment of persons residentin the host State as members of the staff of the delegation or as personsemployed on the private staff;

(e) the location of the premises of the delegation and of the private accom-modation enjoying inviolability under article 59, as well as any otherinformation that may be necessary to identify such premises and accom-modation.

101

2. Where possible, prior notification of arrival and final departure shall alsobe given.

3. The Organization or, as the case may be, the conference shall transmit tothe host State the notifications referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2 of this article.

4. The sending State may also transmit to the host State the notifications referredto in paragraphs 1 and 2 of this article.

Article 48

Acting head of delegation

1. If the head of delegation is absent or unable to perform his function, anacting head of delegation shall be designated from among the other delegates by thehead of delegation or, in case he is unable to do so, by a competent authority of thesending State. The name of the acting head of delegation shall be notified, as thecase may be, to the Organization or to the conference.

2. If a delegation does not have another delegate available to serve as actinghead of delegation, another person may be designated for that purpose. In suchcase credentials must be issued and transmitted in accordance with article 44.

Article 49

Precedence

Precedence among delegations shall be determined by the alphabetical orderof the names of the States used in the Organization.

Article 50

Status of the Head of State and persons of high rank

1. The Head of State or any member of a collégial body performing the functionsof Head of State under the constitution of the State concerned, when he leads thedelegation, shall enjoy in the host State or in a third State, in addition to what isgranted by the present Convention, the facilities, privileges and immunities accordedby international law to Heads of State.

2. The Head of Government, the Minister for Foreign Affairs or other personof high rank, when he leads or is a member of the delegation, shall enjoy in the hostState or hi a third State, in addition to what is granted by the present Convention,the facilities, privileges and immunities accorded by international law to such persons.

Article 51

General facilities

1. The host State shall accord to the delegation all necessary facilities for theperformance of its tasks.

2. The Organization or, as the case may be, the conference shall assist thedelegation in obtaining those facilities and shall accord to the delegation such facilitiesas lie within its own competence.

Article 52

Premises and accommodation

If so requested, the host State and, where necessary, the Organization or theconference shall assist the sending State in obtaining on reasonable terms premisesnecessary for the delegation and suitable accommodation for its members.

102

Article 53

Assistance in respect of privileges and immunities

1. The Organization or, as the case may be, the Organization and the conferenceshall, where necessary, assist the sending State, its delegation and the members ofits delegation in securing the enjoyment of the privileges and immunities providedfor under the present Convention.

2. The Organization or, as the case may be, the Organization and the conferenceshall, where necessary, assist the host State in securing the discharge of the obligationsof the sending State, its delegation and the members of its delegation in respect of theprivileges and immunities provided for under the present Convention.

Article 54

Exemption of the premises from taxation

1. The sending State or any member of the delegation acting on behalf of thedelegation shall be exempt from all national, regional or municipal dues and taxesin respect of the premises of the delegation other than such as represent paymentfor specific services rendered.

2. The exemption from taxation referred to in this article shall not apply tosuch dues and taxes payable under the law of the host State by persons contractingwith the sending State or with a member of the delegation.

Article 55

Inviolability of archives and documents

The archives and documents of the delegation shall be inviolable at all timesand wherever they may be.

Article 56

Freedom of movement

Subject to its laws and regulations concerning zones entry into which is prohibitedor regulated for reasons of national security, the host State shall ensure to all membersof the delegation such freedom of movement and travel in its territory as is necessaryfor the performance of the tasks of the delegation.

Article 57

Freedom of communication

1. The host State shall permit and protect free communication on the part ofthe delegation for all official purposes. In communicating with the Government of thesending State, its permanent diplomatic missions, consular posls, permanent missions,permanent observer missions, special missions, other delegations, and observer dele-gations, wherever situated, the delegation may employ all appropriate means, includingcouriers and messages in code or cipher. However, the delegation may install anduse a wireless transmitter only with the consent of the host State.

2. The official correspondence of the delegation shall be inviolable. Officialcorrespondence means all correspondence relating to the delegation and its tasks.

3. Where practicable, the delegation shall use the means of communication,including the bag and the courier, of the permanent diplomatic mission, of a consular

103

post, of the permanent mission or of the permanent observer mission of the sendingState.

4. The bag of the delegation shall not be opened or detained.

5. The packages constituting the bag of the delegation must bear visible externalmarks of their character and may contain only documents or articles intended forthe official use of the delegation.

6. The courier of the delegation, who shall be provided with an official documentindicating his status and the number of packages constituting the bag, shall be protectedby the host State in the performance of his functions. He shall enjoy personal invio-lability and shall not be liable to any form of arrest or detention.

7. The sending State or the delegation may designate couriers ad hoc of thedelegation. In such cases the provisions of paragraph 6 of this article shall also apply,except that the immunities therein mentioned shall cease to apply when the courierad hoc has delivered to the consignee the delegation's bag in his charge.

8. The bag of the delegation may be entrusted to the captain of a ship or ofa commercial aircraft scheduled to land at an authorized port of entry. He shall beprovided with an official document indicating the number of packages constitutingthe bag, but he shall not be considered to be a courier of the delegation. By arrange-ment with the appropriate authorities of the host State, the delegation may send oneof its members to take possession of the bag directly and freely from the captain ofthe ship or of the aircraft.

Article 58

Personal inviolability

The persons of the head of delegation and of other delegates and members ofthe diplomatic staff of the delegation shall be inviolable. They shall not be liableinter alia to any form of arrest or detention. The host State shall treat them withdue respect and shall take all appropriate steps to prevent any attack on their persons,freedom or dignity and to prosecute and punish persons who have committed suchattacks.

Article 59

Inviolability of private accommodation and property

1. The private accommodation of the head of delegation and of other delegatesand members of the diplomatic staff of the delegation shall enjoy inviolability andprotection.

2. The papers, correspondence and, except as provided in paragraph 2 ofarticle 60, the property of the head of delegation and of other delegates or membersof the diplomatic staff of the delegation shall also enjoy inviolability.

Article 60

Immunity from jurisdiction

1. The head of delegation and other delegates and members of the diplomaticstaff of the delegation shall enjoy immunity from the criminal jurisdiction of thehost State, and immunity from its civil and administrative jurisdiction in respect ofall acts performed in the exercise of their official functions.

2. No measures of execution may be taken in respect of such persons unlessthey can be taken without infringing their rights under articles 58 and 59.

104

3. Such persons are not obliged to give evidence as witnesses.

4. Nothing in this article shall exempt such persons from the civil and admin-istrative jurisdiction of the host State in relation to an action for damages arisingfrom an accident caused by a vehicle, vessel or aircraft, used or owned by the personsin question, where those damages are not recoverable from insurance.

5. Any immunity of such persons from the jurisdiction of the host State doesnot exempt them from the jurisdiction of the sending State.

Article 61

Waiver of immunity

1. The immunity from jurisdiction of the head of delegation and of otherdelegates and members of the diplomatic staff of the delegation and of personsenjoying immunity under article 66 may be waived by the sending State.

2. Waiver must always be express.

3. The initiation of proceedings by any of the persons referred to in paragraph 1of this article shall preclude him from invoking immunity from jurisdiction in respectof any counter-claim directly connected with the principal claim.

4. Waiver of immunity from jurisdiction in respect of civil or administrativeproceedings shall not be held to imply waiver of immunity in respect of the executionof the judgement, for which a separate waiver shall be necessary.

5. If the sending State does not waive the immunity of any of the personsmentioned in paragraph 1 of this article in respect of a civil action, it shall use itsbest endeavours to bring about a just settlement of the case.

Article 62

Exemption from social security legislation

1. Subject to the provisions of paragraph 3 of this article, the head of delegationand other delegates and members of the diplomatic staff of the delegation shall withrespect to services rendered for the sending State be exempt from social securityprovisions which may be in force in the host State.

2. The exemption provided for in paragraph 1 of this article shall also applyto persons who are in the sole private employ of the head of delegation or of anyother delegate or member of the diplomatic staff of the delegation, on condition:

(a) that such employed persons are not nationals of or permanently residentin the host State; and

(Z>) that they are covered by the social security provisions which may be inforce in the sending State or a third State.

3. The head of delegation and other delegates and members of the diplomaticstaff of the delegation who employ persons to whom the exemption provided for inparagraph 2 of this article does not apply shall observe the obligations which the socialsecurity provisions of the host State impose upon employers.

4. The exemption provided for in paragraphs 1 and 2 of this article shall notpreclude voluntary participation in the social security system of the host State providedthat such participation is permitted by that State.

5. The provisions of this article shall not affect bilateral or multilateral agree-ments concerning social security concluded previously and shall not prevent theconclusion of such agreements in the future.

105

Article 63

Exemption from dues and taxes

The head of delegation and other delegates and members of the diplomaticstaff of the delegation shall be exempt, to the extent practicable, from all dues andtaxes, personal or real, national, regional or municipal, except:

(a) indirect taxes of a kind are normally incorporated in the price of goodsor services;

(b) dues and taxes on private immovable property situated in the territory ofthe host State, unless the person concerned holds it on behalf of the sendingState for the purposes of the delegation;

(c) estate, succession or inheritance duties levied by the host State, subject tothe provisions of paragraph 4 of article 68;

(d) dues and taxes on private income having its source in the host State andcapital taxes on investments made in commercial undertakings in the hostState;

(e) charges levied for specific services rendered;

(/) registration, court or record fees, mortage dues and stamp duty, with respectto immovable property, subject to the provisions of article 54.

Article 64

Exemption from personal services

The host State shall exempt the head of delegation and other delegates andmembers of the diplomatic staff of the delegation from all personal services, fromall public service of any kind whatsoever, and from military obligations such as thoseconnected with requisitioning, military contributions and billeting.

Article 65

Exemption from customs duties and inspection

1. The host State shall, in accordance with such laws and regulations as it mayadopt, permit entry of and grant exemption from all customs duties, taxes and relatedcharges other than charges for storage, cartage and similar services, on:

(a) articles for the official use of the delegation;

(b) articles for the personal use of the head of delegation or any other delegateor member of the diplomatic staff of the delegation, imported in his personalbaggage at the time of his first entry into the territory of the host Stateto attend the meeting of the organ or conference.

2. The personal baggage of the head of delegation or any other delegate ormember of the diplomatic staff of the delegation shall be exempt from inspection,unless there are serious grounds for presuming that it contains articles not coveredby the exemptions mentioned in paragraph 1 of this article, or articles the import orexport of which is prohibited by the law or controlled by the quarantine regulationsof the host State. In such cases, inspection shall be conducted only in the presence ofthe person enjoying the exemption or of his authorized representative.

106

Article 66

Privileges and immunities of other persons

1. The members of the family of the head of delegation who accompany himand the members of the family of any other delegate or member of the diplomaticstaff of the delegation who accompany him shall, if they are not nationals of orpermanently resident in the host State, enjoy the privileges and immunities specifiedin articles 58, 60 and 64 and in paragraphs 1(6) and 2 of article 65 and exemptionfrom aliens' registration obligations.

2. Members of the administrative and technical staff of the delegation shall, ifthey are not nationals of or permanently resident in the host State, enjoy the privilegesand immunities specified in articles 58, 59, 60, 62, 63 and 64. They shall also enjoythe privileges specified in paragraph 1(6) of article 65 in respect of articles importedin their personal baggage at the time of their first entry into the; territory of the hostState for the purpose of attending the meeting of the organ or conference. Membersof the family of a member of the administrative and technical staff who accompanyhim shall, if they are not nationals of or permanently resident in the host State, enjoythe privileges and immunities specified in articles 58, 60 and 64 and in paragraph 1(6)of article 65 to the extent accorded to such a member of the staff.

3. Members of the service staff of the delegation who are not nationals of orpermanently resident in the host State shall enjoy the same immunity in respect ofacts performed in the course of their duties as is accorded to members of the admin-istrative and technical staff of the delegation, exemption from dues and taxes on theemoluments they receive by reason of their employment and the exemption specifiedin article 62.

4. Private staff of members of the delegation shall, if they are not nationalsof or permanently resident in the host State, be exempt from dues and taxes on theemoluments they receive by reason of their employment. In other respects, they mayenjoy privileges and immunities only to the extent admitted by the host State. However,the host State must exercise its jurisdiction over those persons in such a manner asnot to interfere unduly with the performance of the tasks of the delegation.

Article 67

Nationals and permanent residents of the host State

1. Except in so far as additional privileges and immunities may be granted bythe host State the head of delegation or any other delegate or member of the diplomaticstaff of the delegation who is a national of or permanently resident in that State shallenjoy only immunity from jurisdiction and inviolability in respect of official acts per-formed in the exercise of his functions.

2. Other members of the staff of the delegation and persons on the privatestaff who are nationals of or permanently resident in the host State shall enjoy privilegesand immunities only to the extent admitted by the host State. However, the hostState must exercise its jurisdiction over those members and persons in such a manneras not to interfere unduly with the performance of the tasks of the delegation.

Article 68

Duration of privileges and immunities

1. Every person entitled to privileges and immunities shall enjoy them fromthe moment he enters the territory of the host State for the purpose of attending the

107

meeting of an organ or conference or, if already in its territory, from the momentwhen his appointment is notified to the host State by the Organization, by the con-ference or by the sending State.

2. When the functions of a person enjoying privileges and immunities havecome to an end, such privileges and immunities shall normally cease at the momentwhen he leaves the territory, or on the expiry of a reasonable period in which to do so.However, with respect to acts performed by such a person in the exercise of hisfunctions as a member of the delegation, immunity shall continue to subsist.

3. In the event of the death of a member of the delegation, the members of hisfamily shall continue to enjoy the privileges and immunities to which they are entitleduntil the expiry of a reasonable period in which to leave the territory.

4. In the event of the death of a member of the delegation not a national ofor permanently resident in the host State or of a member of his family accompanyinghim, the host State shall permit the withdrawal of the movable property of thedeceased, with the exception of any property acquired in the territory the exportof which was prohibited at the time of his death. Estate, succession and inheritanceduties shall not be levied on movable property which is in the host State solelybecause of the presence there of the deceased as a member of the delegation orof the family of a member of the delegation.

Article 69

End of functions

The functions of the head of delegation or of any other delegate or member ofthe diplomatic staff of the delegation shall come to an end, inter alia:

(a) on notification of their termination by the sending State to the Organizationor the conference;

(b) upon the conclusion of the meeting of the organ or the conference.

Article 70

Protection of premises, property and archives

1. When the meeting of an organ or a conference comes to an end, the hostState must respect and protect the premises of the delegation so long as they are usedby it, as well as the property and archives of the delegation. The sending State musttake all appropriate measures to terminate this special duty of the host State as soonas possible.

2. The host State, if requested by the sending State, shall grant the latter facil-ities for removing the property and the archives of the delegation from the territoryof the host State.

PART IV

OBSERVER DELEGATIONS TO ORGANS AND TO CONFERENCES

Article 71

Sending of observer delegations

A State may send an observer delegation to an organ or to a conference inaccordance with the rules of the Organization.

108

Article 72

General provision concerning observer delegations

All the provisions of articles 43 to 70 of the present Convention shall apply toobserver delegations.

PART V

GENERAL PROVISIONS

Article 73

Nationality of the members of the mission, the delegation or the observer delegation

1. The head of mission and members of the diplomatic staff of the mission, thehead of delegation, other delegates and members of the diplomatic staff of the dele-gation, the head of the observer delegation, other observer delegates and membersof the diplomatic staff of the observer delegation should in principle be of thenationality of the sending State.

2. The head of mission and members of the diplomatic staff of the mission maynot be appointed from among persons having the nationality of the host State exceptwith the consent of that State, which may be withdrawn at any time.

3. Where the head of delegation, any other delegate or any member of thediplomatic staff of the delegation or the head of the observer delegation, any otherobserver delegate or any member of the diplomatic staff of the observer delegationis appointed from among persons having the nationality of the host State, the consentof that State shall be assumed if it has been notified of such appointment of a nationalof the host State and has made no objection.

Article 74

Laws concerning acquisition of nationality

Members of the mission, the delegation or the observer delegation not beingnationals of the host State, and members of their families forming part of theirhousehold or, as the case may be, accompanying them, shall not, solely by theoperation of the law of the host State, acquire the nationality of that State.

Article 75

Privileges and immunities in case of multiple functions

When members of the permanent diplomatic mission or of a consular post inthe host State are included in a mission, a delegation or an observer delegation, theyshall retain their privileges and immunities as members of their permanent diplomaticmission or consular post in addition to the privileges and immunities accorded by thepresent Convention.

Article 76

Co-operation between sending States and host States

Whenever necessary and to the extent compatible with the independent exerciseof the functions of the mission, the delegation or the observer delegation, the sendingState shall co-operate as fully as possible with the host State in the conduct of anyinvestigation or prosecution carried out pursuant to the provisions of articles 23,28, 29 and 58.

109

Article 77

Respect for the laws and regulations of the host State

1. Without prejudice to their privileges and immunities, it is the duty of allpersons enjoying such privileges and immunities to respect the laws and regulationsof the host State. They also have a duty not to interfere in the internal affairs ofthat State.

2. In case of grave and manifest violation of the criminal law of the host Stateby a person enjoying immunity from jurisdiction, the sending State shall, unless itwaives the immunity of the person concerned, recall him, terminate his functionswith the mission, the delegation or the observer delegation or secure his departure,as appropriate. The sending State shall take the same action in case of grave andmanifest interference in the internal affairs of the host State. The provisions of this para-graph shall not apply in the case of any act that the person concerned performed incarrying out the functions of the mission or the tasks of the delegation or of theobserver delegation.

3. The premises of the mission and the premises of the delegation shall notbe used in any manner incompatible with the exercise of the functions of the missionor the performance of the tasks of the delegation.

4. Nothing in this article shall be construed as prohibiting the host State fromtaking such measures as are necessary for its own protection. In that event the hostState shall, without prejudice to articles 84 and 85, consult the sending State in anappropriate manner in order to ensure that such measures do not interfere with thenormal functioning of the mission, the delegation or the observer delegation.

5. The measures provided for in paragraph 4 of this article shall be takenwith the approval of the Minister for Foreign Affairs or of any other competentminister hi conformity with the constitutional rules of the host State.

Article 78

Insurance against third party risks

The members of the mission, of the delegation or of the observer delegation shallcomply with all obligations under the laws and regulations of the host State relatingto third-party liability insurance for any vehicle, vessel or aircraft used or ownedby them.

Article 79

Entry into the territory of the host State

1. The host State shall permit entry into its territory of:

(a) members of the mission and members of their families forming part of theirrespective households, and

(6) members of the delegation and members of their families accompanyingthem, and

(c) members of the observer delegation and members of their families accom-panying them.

2. Visas, when required, shall be granted as promptly as possible to any personreferred to in paragraph 1 of this article.

110

Article 80

Facilities for departure

The host State shall, if requested, grant facilities to enable persons enjoyingprivileges and immunities, other than nationals of the host State, and members of thefamilies of such persons irrespective of their nationality, to leave its territory.

Article 81

Transit through the territory of a third State

1. If a head of mission or a member of the diplomatic staff of the mission,a head of delegation, other delegate or member of the diplomatic staff of the dele-gation, a head of an observer delegation, other observer delegate or member of thediplomatic staff of the observer delegation passes through or is in the territory of athird State which has granted him a passport visa if such visa was necessary, whileproceeding to take up or to resume his functions, or when returning to his owncountry, the third State shall accord him inviolability and such other immunities asmay be required to ensure his transit.

2. The provisions of paragraph 1 of this article shall also apply in the case of:

(à) members of the family of the head of mission or of a member of thediplomatic staff of the mission forming part of his household and enjoyingprivileges and immunities, whether travelling with him or travelling sepa-rately to join him or to return to their country;

(b) members of the family of the head of delegation, of any other delegate ormember of the diplomatic staff of the delegation who are accompanying himand enjoy privileges and immunities, whether travelling with him or travellingseparately to join him or to return to their country;

(c) members of the family of the head of the observer delegation, of any otherobserver delegate or member of the diplomatic staff of the observer dele-gation, who are accompanying him and enjoy privileges and immunities,whether travelling with him or travelling separately to join him or to returnto their country.

3. In circumstances similar to those specified in paragraphs 1 and 2 of this article,third States shall not hinder the passage of members of the administrative and technicalor service staff, and of members of their families, through their territories.

4. Third States shall accord to official correspondence and other official com-munications in transit, including messages in code or cipher, the same freedom andprotection as the host State is bound to accord under the present Convention. Theyshall accord to the couriers of the mission, of the delegation or of the observer dele-gation, who have been granted a passport visa if such visa was necessary, and to thebags of the mission, of the delegation or of the observer delegation in transit the sameinviolability and protection as the host State is bound to accord under the presentConvention.

5. The obligations of third States under paragraph 1, 2, 3 and 4 of this articleshall also apply to the persons mentioned respectively in those paragraphs, and tothe official communications and bags of the mission, of the delegation or of theobserver delegation when they are present in the territory of the third State owingto force majeure.

Ill

Article 82

Non-recognition of States or governments or absence of diplomatic or consular relations

1. The rights and obligations of the host State and of the sending State underthe present Convention shall be affected neither by the non-recognition by one ofthose States of the other State or of its government nor by the non-existence or theseverance of diplomatic or consular relations between them.

2. The establishment or maintenance of a mission, the sending or attendanceof a delegation or of an observer delegation or any act in application of the presentConvention shall not by itself imply recognition by the sending State of the hostState or its government or by the host State of the sending State or its government.

Article 83

Non-discrimination

In the application of the provisions of the present Convention no discriminationshall be made as between States.

Article 84

Consultations

If a dispute between two or more States Parties arises out of the applicationor interpretation of the present Convention, consultations between them shall be heldupon the resquest of any of them. At the request of any of the parties to the dispute,the Organization or the conference shall be invited to join in the consultations.

Article 85

Conciliation

1. If the dispute is not disposed of as a result of the consultations referred toin article 84 within one month from the date of their inception, any State participatingin the consultations may bring the dispute before a conciliation commission constitutedin accordance with the provisions of this article by giving written notice to the Organ-ization and to the other States participating in the consultations.

2. Each conciliation commission shall be composed of three members: twomembers who shall be appointed respectively by each of the parties to the dispute,and a Chairman appointed in accordance with paragraph 3 of this article. Each StateParty to the present Convention shall designate in advance a person to serve as amember of such a commission. It shall notify the designation to the Organization,which shall maintain a register of persons so designated. If it does not make thedesignation in advance, it may do so during the conciliation procedure up to themoment at which the Commission begins to draft the report which it is to preparein accordance with paragraph 7 of this article.

3. The Chairman of the Commission shall be chosen by the other two members.If the other two members are unable to agree within one month from the noticereferred to in paragraph 1 of this article or if one of the parties to the dispute hasnot availed itself of its right to designate a member of the Commission, the Chairmanshall be designated at the request of one of the parties to the dispute by the chiefadministrative officer of the Organization. The appointment shall be made within aperiod of one month from such request. The chief administrative officer of the Organ-ization shall appont as the Chairman a qualified jurist who is neither an official of theOrganization nor a national of any State party to the dispute.

112

4. Any vacancy shall be filled in the manner prescribed for the initial ap-pointment.

5. The Commission shall function as soon as the Chairman has been appointedeven if its composition is incomplete.

6. The Commission shall establish its own rules of procedure and shall reachits decisions and recommendations by a majority vote. It may recommend to theOrganization, if the Organization is so authorized in accordance with the Charter ofthe United Nations, to request an advisory opinion from the International Court ofJustice regarding the application or interpretation of the present Convention.

7. If the Commission is unable to obtain an agreement among the parties tothe dispute on a settlement of the dispute within two months from the appointmentof its Chairman, it shall prepare as soon as possible a report of its proceedings andtransmit it to the parties to the dispute. The report shall include the Commission'sconclusions upon the facts and questions of law and the recommendations which ithas submitted to the parties to the dispute in order to facilitate a settlement of thedispute. The two months time limit may be extended by decision of the Commission.The recommendations in the report of the Commission shall not be binding on theparties to the dispute unless all the parties to the dispute have accepted them. Never-theless, any party to the dispute may declare unilaterally that it will abide by therecommendations in the report so far as it is concerned.

8. Nothing in the preceding paragraphs of this article shall preclude the estab-lishment of any other appropriate procedure for the settlement of disputes arisingout of the application or interpretation of the present Convention or the conclusionof any agreement between the parties to the dispute to submit the dispute to aprocedure instituted in the Organization or to any other procedure.

9. This article is without prejudice to provisions concerning the settlement ofdisputes contained in international agreements in force between States or betweenStates and international organizations.

PART VI

FINAL CLAUSES

Article 86

Signature

The present Convention shall be open for signature by all States until 30 Sep-tember 1975 at the Federal Ministry for Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Austriaand subsequently, until 30 March 1976, at United Nations Headquarters in New York.

Article 87

Ratification

The present Convention is subject to ratification. The instruments of ratificationshall be deposited with the Secretary-General of the United Nations.

Article 88

Accession

The present Convention shall remain open for accession by any State. Theinstruments of accession shall be deposited with the Secretary-General of the UnitedNations.

113

Article 89

Entry into force

1. The present Convention shall enter into force on the thirtieth day followingthe date of deposit of the thirty-fifth instrument of ratification or accession.

2. For each State ratifying or acceding to the Convention after the deposit ofthe thirty-fifth instrument of ratification or accession, the Convention shall enter intoforce on the thirtieth day after the deposit by such State of its instrument of ratifi-cation or accession.

Article 90

Implementation by organizations

After the entry into force of the present Convention, the competent organ of aninternational organization of a universal character may adopt a decision to implementthe relevant provisions of the Convention. The Organization shall communicate thedecision to the host State and to the depositary of the Convention.

Article 91

Notifications by the depositary

1. As depositary of the present Convention, the Secretary-General of the UnitedNations shall inform all States:

(a) of signatures to the Convention and of the deposit of instruments of ratifi-cation or accession, in accordance with articles 86, 87 and 88;

(b) of the date on which the Convention will enter into force, in accordancewith article 89;

(c) of any decision communicated in accordance with article 90.

2. The Secretary-General of the United Nations shall also inform all States,as necessary, of other acts, notifications or communications relating to the presentConvention.

Article 92

Authentic texts

The original of the present Convention, of which the Chinese, English, French,Russian and Spanish texts are equally authentic, shall be deposited with the Secretary-General of the United Nations, who shall send certified copies thereof to all States.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF the undersigned Plenipotentiaries, being duly authorized theretoby their respective Governments, have signed the present Convention.

DONE AT VIENNA, this fourteenth day of March, one thousand nine hundred andseventy-five.

(b) RESOLUTIONS ADOPTED BY THE CONFERENCERESOLUTION RELATING TO THE OBSERVER STATUS OF NATIONAL LIBERATION MOVEMENTS

RECOGNIZED BY THE ORGANIZATION OF AFRICAN UNITY AND/OR BY THE LEAGUEOF ARAB STATES

The United Nations Conference on the Representation of Slates in Their Relationswith International Organizations,

Recalling that, by its resolution 3072 (XXVIII) of 30 November 1973, the Gen-eral Assembly referred to the Conference the draft articles on the representation of

114

States in their relations with international organizations adopted by the InternationalLaw Commission at its twenty-third session,

Noting that the draft articles adopted by the Commission deal only with therepresentation of States in their relations with international organizations,

Recalling further that, by its resolution 3247 (XXIX) of 29 November 1974, theGeneral Assembly decided to invite the national liberation movements recognized bythe Organization of African Unity and/or by the League of Arab States in their respec-tive regions to participate in the Conference as observers, in accordance with thepractice of the United Nations,

Noting the current practice of inviting the above-mentioned national liberationmovements to participate as observers in the sessions and work of the General Assemblyof the United Nations, in conferences held under the auspices of the General Assemblyor under the auspices of other United Nations organs, and in meetings of the specializedagencies and other organizations of the United Nations family,

Convinced that the participation of the above-mentioned national liberation move-ments in the work of international organizations helps to strengthen international peaceand co-operation,

Desirous of ensuring the effective participation of the above-mentioned movementsas observers in the work of international organizations and of regulating, to that end,their status and the facilities, privileges and immunities necessary for the performanceof their tasks,

1. Requests the General Assembly of the United Nations at its thirtieth regularsession to examine this question without delay;

2. Recommends, in the meantime, the States concerned to accord to delegationsof national liberation movements which are recognized by the Organization of AfricanUnity and/or by the League of Arab States in their respective regions and which havebeen granted observer status by the international organization concerned, the facilities,privileges and immunities necessary for the performance of their tasks and to be guidedtherein by the pertinent provisions of the Convention adopted by this Conference;

3. Decides to include the present resolution in the Final Act of the Conference.1

RESOLUTION RELATING TO THE APPLICATION OF THE CONVENTIONIN FUTURE ACTIVITIES OF INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS

The United Nations Conference on the Representation of States in Their Relationswith International Organizations,

Considering that the Vienna Convention on the Representation of States in TheirRelations with International Organizations of a Universal Character will help to im-prove relations between States within the framework of international organizationsand at conferences convened by, or under the auspices of, such organizations,

Bearing in mind that the above-mentioned Convention will help to prevent disputesbetween sending States and host States,

Recommends to the General Assembly of the United Nations that a suitable re-quest should be made to the Secretary-General to inform Member States whetherStates that have asked to be hosts of future international organizations of a universalcharacter or of conferences convened by, or under the auspices of, international organ-

1 At its thirtieth session, the General Assembly deferred consideration of this resolutionto its thirty-first session.

115

izations of a universal character have duly ratified or have acceded to the ViennaConvention on the Representation of States in Their Relations with International Organ-izations of a Universal Character.2- 3

2 At its thirtieth session, the General Assembly deferred consideration of this resolutionto its thirty-first session.

3 The Conference adopted three other resolutions which are not reproduced here: seethe Final Act of the Conference (A/CONF.67/15) in Official Records of the United NationsConference on the Representation of Slates in Their Relations with International Organiza-tions, Documents of the Conference (A/CONF.67/18/Add.l—Uniled Nations publication,Sales No. E.75.V.12), pp. 204-205.

116

Chapter V

DECISIONS OF ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNALS OF THE UNITEDNATIONS AND RELATED INTERGOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS

A. Decisions of the Administrative Tribunal of Ithe United Nations1

1. JUDGEMENT No. 195 (18 APRIL 1975):2 SOOD v. SECRETARY-GENERAL OF THEUNITED NATIONS

Application from a former staff member who was terminated before his fixed-term appointment expired but subsequently obtained the cancellation of that measure—Legal consequences of the cancellation of a decision because the requirements of dueprocess were not fulfilled—Right of the person concerned to have his qualificationsfor having his fixed-term appointment converted into a permanent appointment exam-ined as if the cancelled decision had never been taken

The applicant had been granted several fixed-term appointments. During the lastbut one of those appointments, an incident occurred which led to a letter of reprimandbeing addressed to him. At the end of that appointment, however, he was evaluatedin a periodic report in which his performance was described as "satisfactory" andwas granted a new one-year appointment which was to expire on 30 April 1973. Fol-lowing a series of incidents, it was decided to terminate his appointment on 5 January1973 for unsatisfactory service, in accordance with staff regulation 9.1 (e).

The case was referred to the Joint Appeals Board, which considered that in theexamination of the charges which led to the termination decision the applicant hadbeen denied due process; it also found the circumstances of the case did not warrant

1 Under article 2 of its Statute, the Administrative Tribunal of the United Nations iscompetent to hear and pass judgement upon applications alleging non-observance of con-tracts of employment of staff members of the Secretariat of the United Nations or of theterms of appintment of such staff members. Article 14 of the Statute states that the com-petence of the Tribunal may be extended to any specialized agency upon the terms establishedby a special agreement to be made with each such agency by the Secretary-General of theUnited Nations. By the end of 1975, two agreements of general scope, dealing with thenon-observance of contracts of employment and of terms of appointment, had been con-cluded, pursuant to the above provision, with two specialized agencies: the InternationalCivil Aviation Organization and the Inter-Governmental Maritime Consultative Organization.In addition, agreements limited to applications alleging non-observance of the Regulationsof the United Nations Joint Staff Pension Fund had been concluded with the InternationalLabour Organisation, the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, theUnited Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, the World Health Organ-ization, the International Telecommunication Union, the International Civil Aviation Organi-zation, the World Meteorological Organization and the International Atomic Energy Agency.

The Tribunal is open not only to any staff member, even after his employment hasceased, but also to any person who succeeded to the staff member's rights on his death orwho can show that he is entitled to rights under any contract or terms of appointment.

2 Mr. R. Venkataraman, President; Mr. Z. Rossides, Member; Sir Roger Stevens, Member.

117

the taking of the contested action. It therefore recommended the cancellation of thetermination decision and also recommended that the Secretary-General should giveconsideration to the possible conversion of the applicant's fixed-term appointment tonine-month probationary appointment leading to a permanent appointment or, alter-natively, should pay the applicant an ex gratia indemnity equivalent to six months'base salary. The Secretary-General accepted the first of those recommendations butrejected the second.

The Tribunal, to which the case was referred, noted that at the time of histermination the applicant had been eligible for consideration under the new policydescribed in document 262/5 dated 1 June 1972, entitled "Redefinition of ContractualPolicy for Local Staff", whereby local staff members who have served not less thanfour one-year terms on fixed-term appointments may be recommended for a proba-tionary appointment which may, where appropriate, lead to a permanent appointment.It was true that the document was marked "Confidential" and had not been officiallybrought to the knowledge of the applicant. However, since its purpose was to enunciatea new policy of providing a uniform and more equitable career prospect for localstaff, and to bring about a fundamental change in the future conditions of employmentof precisely that category of staff into which the applicant fell, it had created rightsfor staff members in that category even though they might have been unaware of itsexistence or of the rights thus created.

The Tribunal noted that the cancellation of the termination decision pursuant tothe recommendation of the Joint Appeals Board had had the effect of reinstating theapplicant until the expiry of his fixed-term appointment but that the applicant had notbeen considered for conversion of his fixed-term appointment in accordance with theaforementioned document.

The Tribunal observed that the respondent had accepted the recommendation ofthe Joint Appeals Board that the termination decision be cancelled without dissentingfrom the reasons on which it was based. In its Judgement No. 185, the Tribunal hadobserved:

"This is thus a rescission effected by the competent authority who, havingexpressed no reservations concerning the reasons given by the Joint AppealsBoard, must be assumed to have accepted the reasons derived from the irre-gularity of the decision."3

The reasons given by the Joint Appeals Board in support of its conclusion thatthe applicant had been denied due process must therefore be assumed to have beenaccepted by the respondent.

Without seeking to call in question the principle, invoked by the respondent,that a fixed-term appointment does not carry any expectancy of renewal or conversionto any other type of appointment, the Tribunal observed that where a terminationdecision had been cancelled and the reasons for such cancellation had not been chal-lenged by the respondent, the parties should be restored to the status quo and due con-sideration should be given to the rights of the staff member as if there had been notermination decision, nor reasons for such action. In Judgement No. 185 the Tribunalhad stated:

"It is for the Tribunal to determine whether, by that decision, the Respondentdrew all the necessary legal inferences from the rescission and went as far aswas required in restoring the status quo."*

3 See Juridical Yearbook, 1974, p. 111.* Ibid., p. 112.

118

The record showed that the decision to terminate the applicant and the decisionnot to consider the possibility of converting his fixed-term appointment in accordancewith the aforementioned document had been taken simultaneously and on the basisof the same allegations. Since the first of those decisions had been taken without dueprocess, as noted above, it followed in the Tribunal's view that the second decision waslikewise vitiated by lack of due process. Rather than ordering the respondent to givedue consideration, on the basis of an impartial review of a fair and accurate recordof the applicant's performance, to granting him a probationary appointment, the Tri-bunal preferred, in view of the lapse of time and the other circumstances of the case,to compensate the applicant for the injury sustained by awarding him as compensationone year's net base salary.

2. JUDGEMENT No. 196 (18 APRIL 1975) :5 BACK v. SECRETARY-GENERAL OF THEUNITED NATIONS AND UNITED NATIONS JOINT STAFF PENSION BOARD

Application for compensation for financial losses linked to the devaluation of thedollar—The inequality among retired staff members of the United Nations which mayresult from a currency devaluation not attributable to the Organization does not imposeon the latter any spécifie duties towards any retired staff member—Question of thedate on which payments relating to retirement must be made—Granting of compensa-tion for damage caused by undue delay in the payments of sums due in that regard

Before retiring, the applicant had expressed the desire to receive the reduced pen-sion together with the lump sum referred to in article 29 of the Regulations of theUnited Nations Joint Staff Pension Fund. However, more than two and a half monthswere to pass between the date on which his service terminated and the payment of thelump sum and the first periodic pension benefit. Considering that that constituted anundue delay which, because of the reduction in the value of the dollar in relation tothe Swiss franc, had caused him appreciable damage, the applicant requested theTribunal to grant him, inter alia, a sum corresponding to the difference between thelump sum which he should have received on 29 January 1973 at the exchange rateapplicable on that date and that which he had in fact received on 6 March 1973.

The Tribunal first noted that the application was directed against both theSecretary-General of the United Nations and the United Nations Joint Staff PensionBoard. It noted that the two respondents had submitted a joint answer, the pleas ofwhich were as follows:

"The Tribunal is respectfully requested to find that Applicant has failed toestablish any obligation, based on any provision of his contract of employmentor terms of appointment (including the Staff and Pension Fund Regulations andRules), on the part of either Respondent to assure him of payment on or at therate of exchange prevailing on the date his pension entitlement vested; nor hasApplicant proved fault on the part of either Respondent, not outweighed by hisown lack of diligence, causing him to be paid only after an allegedly unreasonabledelay from the date of such vesting."Consequently, the Tribunal considered the facts in the case without pronouncing

on their imputability to one or other of the respondents and, in particular, withoutdetermining the share of responsibility, if any, which might be apportioned to eachof them.

The Tribunal recalled the conclusions it had reached in its Judgement No. 182,6

according to which it did not seem that the inequality which the devaluation of the

5 Mme P. Bastid, Vice-Président, presiding; Mr. F. A. Forteza, Member; Sir RogerStevens, Member.

«See Juridical Yearbook, 1974, p. 107.

119

dollar, which was not attributable to the Organization, might create among retiredstaff members of the Organization would impose on the latter any specific dutiestowards a retired staff member. It also referred to Judgement No. 2347 of the Adminis-trative Tribunal of the International Labour Organisation, which stated that "uponwell-established principles there can be no claim in respect of currency devaluationas such". It therefore felt that it must consider only:

(1) Whether any statutory provision required payment on a specific date;

(2) If such was not the case, whether the date of payment must be consideredas having been unduly delayed by reason of the conduct of the respondents.

Referring to section 1.2 of the Administrative Rules of the Fund, which makepayment of a benefit subject to certification by the Secretary of the Board "that theconditions for payment of the benefit have been fulfilled", the Tribunal rejected theapplicant's argument that payment must be made on the day on which entitlement toa benefit took effect. Referring to article 48 (b) of the Fund Regulations, it alsorejected the applicant's arguments that the rate of exchange to be applied was thatin force on the date of commencement of entitlement.

However, the Tribunal considered—in particular, because the termination notifica-tion addressed to the Secretary of the Board of the Organization contained an unusualnotification which should normally have provoked a request for explanation—that thedelay in the payment of the sum due to the applicant demonstrated negligence in theoperation of administrative services such that the resulting damages to the applicantmust be made good by the respondents.

The Tribunal considered that no precise date could be fixed as being that onwhich payment should have been made but considered that the prejudice sufferedshould be calculated by taking the date on which the applicant would have been paidat the earliest and that on which he would have been paid at the latest if the adminis-tration had shown normal diligence, and taking the average of the two sums in Swissfrancs that would have been paid to the applicant if the payment order had beenexecuted in Geneva on the two dates in question.

Since the sum thus calculated constituted compensation for damages incurred andnot a benefit under the pension scheme, the Tribunal considered that the respondentscould not invoke article 45 of the Pension Fund Regulations (which relates to thecase of a benefit due but not paid) to contest the applicant's claim for payment ofinterest on the sums in question, and it decided to grant interest at the rate of 6 percent per annum.

3. JUDGEMENT No. 197 (22 APRIL 1975) :8 OSMAN v. SECRETARY-GENERAL OF THEUNITED NATIONS

Application for revision of a judgement—Correction of this judgement underarticle 12 in fine of the Statute of the Tribunal—Rejection of the application notwith-standing the implications of the correction in question on the equity of the case—Obliga-tion of the Tribunal, as a judicial organ, to apply existing law

The applicant, a former associate participant in the United Nations Joint StaffPension Fund, had filed an application with the Tribunal in 1973 in which he claimedthat he had been wrongfully deprived of benefits under a provision of the PensionFund Regulations relating to conditions for admission as a full participant. The Tri-

p. 131.8 Mr. R. Venkataraman, President; Mme P. Bastid, Vice-Président; Mr. F. A. Forteza,

Member.

120

bunal had rejected this claim in its Judgement No. ISO,9 which contained the state-ment that in order to become a participant in the Pension Fund the applicant should,at the time of his last contract, have been employed for a period longer by three monthsand one week than the period for which he had actually been employed.

The purpose of the present application was to bring about the revision of Judge-ment No. 180. It was stated that the figure of three months and one week should bereplaced by that of one month and one week in order to take into account the twomonths of the applicant's employment prior to his period of continuous service.

On this point, the Tribunal noted that its calculation had been based on the PensionFund Regulations effective on 1 January 1967, which referred to a "continuous periodof . . . employment" (article II, para. 2 (6)). The 1963 Regulations, however, didnot contain the requirement that the employment be "continuous". In the opinion ofthe Tribunal, a strict interpretation of the Regulations did not allow the two monthsof employment in question to be taken into account. Acknowledging, however, thatthe Secretary of the Joint Staff Pension Board had recognized in a memorandum theapplicant's right to inclusion of the two months of employment in his total periodof service, the Tribunal decided that Judgement No. 180 should be corrected on thatpoint.

In applying for revision of the judgement in question under article 12 of theStatute of the Tribunal, the applicant contended that, subsequent to the said judgement,he had discovered that the Administration had not provided him at the proper timewith a copy of the Pension Fund Regulations which were in force from 1 January1967. When, however, the Tribunal, in its Judgement No. 180, had stated that therehad been a lapse on the part of the applicant in not bringing the matter at the relevanttime to the attention of the Administration, it had clearly taken it for granted thatthe applicant was familiar with the said Regulations at the time in question. The prob-lem was therefore to determine whether the applicant had in fact been aware of therelevant provisions of the Pension Fund Regulations at the appropriate time. The Tri-bunal noted in this regard that regardless of any short-comings in the system oftransmitting amendments to the regulations and rules to staff members serving in thefield, the applicant's attention had been specifically drawn, in the various letters ofappointment he had received, to the possible relevance of the Pension Fund Regula-tions to his case. Furthermore, the applicant had been fully aware of the PensionFund Regulations which came into effect on 1 January 1963, and, in so far as theparticular point which lay at the origin of the dispute was concerned, the text adoptedin 1967 had not created a different system.

Moreover, the following information was received by the Tribunal from the re-spondent:

"More generally, it has never been the policy of the Organization to allowthe effect of an extension of an appointment on a staff member's pension benefitto determine the duration of such extension. The Organization has always con-sidered that the effect upon a staff member's pension benefits should be a conse-quence of the decision on how long to extend his contract in the light of the dutiesfor the performance of which his services are required. Therefore, when pre-paring a letter of appointment to be issued to a technical assistance expert, TARSdoes not take into consideration, in determining the duration of the appointment,the effects of such duration on the pension rights of the expert."

» See Juridical Yearbook, 1973, p. 111.

121

Without expressing an opinion on the substance of those observations, the Tribunalfelt that they had no relevance to the consideration of a request for revision withinthe meaning of article 12 of its Statute.

The Tribunal drew the attention of the parties to Judgements No. 23010 andNo. 24511 of the Administrative Tribunal of the International Labour Organisationin which that Tribunal had considered that, in determining the duration of a contract,the Organization could not disregard the right of the staff member concerned to apension and that, by not granting him an appointment of appropriate duration, theOrganization had failed "to take an essential fact into consideration". It added that,since those two judgements could not be regarded as a new fact the discovery of whichmight constitute a ground for revision under article 12 of the Statute, it was irrelevantfor the differences between those cases and the present one to be considered.

Finally, the Tribunal recalled that, notwithstanding the implications of the afore-mentioned correction on the equity of the case, it was bound, as a judicial organ, toapply existing law, including the provisions of its Statute, and did not have the powerto decide a case ex aequo et bono. Therefore, subject to the said correction, it rejectedthe application.

4. JUDGEMENT No. 198 (23 APRIL 1975) :12 LANE v. SECRETARY-GENERAL OF THEUNITED NATIONS

Application for rescission of a decision to terminate, in accordance with staffregulation 9.1 (c), a probationary appointment after a period of nearly two years beyondthe expiry of the said appointment — Conditions to which the conversion of a proba-tionary appointment into a permanent appointment is subject — Entitlement of a staffmember anomalously kept in service beyond the maximum probationary period, owingto an administrative error, to due process for the assessment of the suitability of astaff member on probationary appointment for a permanent appointment

The applicant was granted a probationary appointment for a period of two years,which upon its normal expiration was extended for one additional year. He was thenkept in service for some twenty-two months, at the end of which his appointmentwas terminated in accordance with staff regulation 9.1 (c).

In his application he requested the Tribunal to rescind the decision terminatinghis services, contending that, as his appointment had not been terminated at the endof his extended probationary service, his employment status must be deemed to havebeen that of a staff member holding a permanent appointment. He based this con-tention on staff rule 104.12 (a), which reads as follows:

"At the end of the probationary service the holder of a probationary appoint-ment shall be granted either a permanent or a regular appointment or be separatedfrom the service."

The Tribunal nevertheless considered that the text thus quoted did not warranta conclusion that probationary appointments not terminated at the end of the proba-tionary period automatically become permanent appointments. The fact that theapplicant was transferred to another post at the end of his extended probationaryperiod and was continued in service for some twenty-two months did not indicatethat he had acceded to the status of a permanent staff member or had been treatedas such. Staff rule 104.13 (a) (i) provides as follows:

10 See Juridical Yearbook, 1974, p. 127.n/Wrf., p. 136.12 Mr. R. Venkataraman, President; Mr. F. T. P. Plimpton, Vice-Président; Mr. Z. Ros-

sides, Member.

122

"The permanent appointment may be granted to staff members who are holdersof a probationary appointment and who, by their qualifications, performance andconduct, have fully demonstrated their suitability as international civil servantsand have shown that they meet the high standards of efficiency, competence andintegrity established in the Charter."

It followed that the granting of a permanent appointment was subject to certainconditions being met and that there could be no automatic conversion of a proba-tionary appointment into a permanent appointment. After considering the circum-stances of the case, the Tribunal reached the conclusion that the applicant did notpossess the status of a staff member with a permanent appointment.

In the opinion of the Tribunal, the applicant's employment status during his finaltwenty-two months of service was in effect a continuation, although irregular, of hisprobationary appointment through the default of the Administration. While recog-nizing the right of the Secretary-General to terminate probationary appointments understaff regulation 9.1 (c), the Tribunal pointed out that the applicant's probationaryappointment had not been terminated during the period of probation but long afterthe expiry of such period. The Tribunal therefore held that the applicant, havingcompleted his probationary period, was entitled to due process for the assessment ofthe suitability of a staff member on probationary appointment for a permanent appoint-ment. The Tribunal noted in this regard that no periodic report had been preparedfor the period after the expiry of the extended probationary period and that althoughan assessment of the applicant's case had been made by the Appointment and Promo-tion Committee in 1970, the termination decision was reached without the Committeehaving had any possibility of considering the most recent information on the applicant'sperformance and without the applicant being afforded an opportunity to state his case.

Taking into account the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal considered itpreferable for the injury suffered by the applicant to be redressed by an award ofcompensation for fault of procedure rather than by a remand for correction ofprocedure.

The applicant, in addition, requested compensation in respect of the two periodsof home leave to which, according to him, he should have been entitled during hisperiod of service. The applicant pointed out in that regard that because of the absencefrom the files of any "Personnel Action" form "to establish his status as a staffmember on an extended probationary appointment", his oral inquiries as to his enti-tlement to home leave had met with a negative reply from the Administration.

In the view of the Tribunal, it followed from the absence of a "Personnel Action"form that even if the applicant had made a formal request for home leave, the responsewould not have been different. The Tribunal held that the applicant had been deprivedof his rights by reason of an anomalous employment situation and was thereforeentitled to reimbursement of his expenses, subject to proof that such expenses hadbeen incurred by him. Finally, on the basis of the same reasoning and subject to thesame condition, the Tribunal awarded reimbursement of his removal costs.

5. JUDGEMENT No. 199 (24 APRIL 1975) :13 FRACTON v. SECRETARY-GENERAL OF THEUNITED NATIONS

Application for rescission of a decision not to renew a fixed-term appointment— Limits of the Tribunal's authority to review such a decision — Principle of goodfaith in relations between the parties

i3 Mr. R. Venkataraman, President; Mr. F. T. P. Plimpton, Vice-Président; Sir RogerStevens, Member.

123

The applicant, who entered the service of the United Nations Information Centreat Teheran (Iran) on 7 September 1968 as an Information Assistant, received a numberof fixed-term appointments. When the Organization decided not to renew his appoint-ment, he filed with the Tribunal an application contesting this decision, which, hesaid, constituted a violation of his rights (having regard in particular to the estab-lishment of a new régime under which Information Assistants could be offered regularappointments after a year or two of satisfactory service) and which, again accordingto him, was motivated by prejudice on the part of his superiors.

The Tribunal recalled that the decision whether or not to renew a fixed-termappointment was within the discretion of the Secretary-General and, in the absenceof countervailing circumstances, non-renewal would not give rise to any rights on thepart of the staff member. The particular circumstances of this case should thereforebe reviewed, with special reference to the handling of the matter by the Director ofthe Centre, whose recommendations had led to the contested decision.

In this connexion, the Tribunal considered that in criticizing the applicant inconfidential letters which were not communicated to the applicant, in failing to discloseto him the unsubstantiated charges brought against him, and in expressing the intentionto make a misstatement regarding the applicability to his case of the new régimereferred to in the first paragraph above, the Director of the Centre had shown a lackof candour and acted in an equivocal and dubious manner toward the applicant.Furthermore, the decision not to renew the appointment was taken on the basis ofcharges contained in confidential letters not disclosed to the applicant and beforethe relevant periodic report had been drawn up. The Tribunal found that the applicanthad not been given the fair consideration required to determine whether an Informa-tion Assistant could benefit from the new régime referred to above and that therespondent had disregarded the principle of good faith in relations between the partiesreferred to in Judgement No. 128.14

With regard to the question whether the contested decision was motivated byprejudice on the part of the Director of the Centre, the Tribunal concluded, havingexamined the relevant material, that, while it was clear that there had been a clashof personalities and that in many of his dealings with the applicant the Director hadbeen unduly suspicious and evasive, the evidence before it did not establish that hehad been motivated by prejudice.

The Tribunal found it preferable to order the payment of compensation in lieuof specific performance on the analogy of its rulings in Judgements No. 6815 andNo. 9216 rather than ordering remand of the case so that a proper review of theapplicant's record of service and his suitability for the post of Information Assistantmight be carried out. It fixed the compensation at the equivalent of six months'net base salary.

Lastly, the Tribunal ordered the removal from the applicant's official status fileof the periodic report prepared after the decision not to renew the applicant's appoint-ment as well as certain confidential letters which had not been brought to the noticeof the applicant and which were likely to prejudice the applicant's prospects foremployment with international organizations.

14 See Juridical Yearbook, 1969, p. 184.is Judgements of the United Nations Administrative Tribunal, Nos. 1 to 70 (AT/DEC/1

to 70—United Nations publication, Sales No.: 58.X.1), p. 398.i6 See Juridical Yearbook, 1964. p. 205.

124

6. JUDGEMENT No. 200 (24 APRIL 1975) :17 DEARINO v. SECRETARY-GENERAL OF THEUNITED NATIONS

Application for rescission of a decision of the Secretary-General refusing, on thebasis of a recommendation of the Advisory Board on Compensation Claims, to re-opena case concerning compensation — Broad discretionary powers of the Secretary-Generalwith regard to the matter — Irregularity of a decision of the Secretary-General takenon the basis of a recommendation of the Advisory Board made as the result of failureto observe the requirements of due process — Failure to re-employ a recipient ofcompensation for a service-incurred illness cannot be treated as a termination on theground of incapacity for further service unless the applicant can claim that he hadan appointment entitling him to permanent or continuous service — Rescission of thecontested decision and fixing of compensation to be paid to the applicant if theSecretary-General does not consider that further action should be taken

During a period of employment in Thailand under a fixed-term contract theapplicant had contracted pulmonary tuberculosis as a result of which he submittedto the Advisory Board on Compensation Claims a claim for "compensation for theloss of livelihood in [his] normal occupation, through a disability resulting from anillness attributed to the performance of official duties on behalf of the United Nations".

The Advisory Board, noting that there was good reason to believe that hisemployment in Thailand would have continued had he not become ill and furthernoting that the claimant had been unable to obtain any employment in his countryof origin and that he was barred, for medical reasons, from consideration for employ-ment by the United Nations or the specialized agencies for a period of three yearsfrom the date of his recovery, recommended to the Secretary-General that he shouldbe granted compensation for loss of earning capacity in an amount of £2,500 perannum for a period ending three years from the date of his recovery or until suchtime as he was gainfully employed, whichever period was the shorter. That recom-mendation was accepted by the Secretary-General.

Not being satisfied with the solution adopted, the applicant requested, on thebasis of several certificates from both his own physicians arid a medical board estab-lished by the competent ministry of his country of origin, that his case should bere-opened by the Advisory Board on Compensation Claims and the respondent shouldpay him annual compensation in accordance with article 11.2 (d) of Appendix D tothe Staff Rules. The Advisory Board, considering that no grounds existed to warrantre-opening the case, made a recommendation to that effect to the Secretary-General,which was accepted.

The case was referred to the Tribunal, which observed that under article 9 ofAppendix D to the Staff Rules, it was within the discretion, of the Secretary-Generalto re-open a case relating to compensation under those Rules. Such discretion, however,could not be exercised unjustly or unreasonably. In its Judgement No. 10318 theTribunal had held as follows:

"Article 9 gives the Respondent wide power to re-open a case and conse-quently to the Board to recommend that it be re-opened. Since the new decisionof the Respondent is taken on the recommendation of the Board, the latter mustobserve the requirements of due process in arriving at that recommendation."The Tribunal then felt that it must consider whether the recommendation of the

Advisory Board mentioned above was vitiated by lack of due process. In that connexion

17 Mr. R. Venkataraman, President; Mme P. Bastid, Vice-Président; Sir Roger Stevens,Member.

is See Juridical Yearbook, 1966, p. 216.

125

it noted that due process required that an authority competent to make recommenda-tions or decisions should arrive at its conclusions without factual errors or prejudiceon the matter placed before it. In the present case, the Tribunal observed, therewas a difference of opinion between the Medical Director of the United Nations andthe applicant's physicians over the latter's medical reports; in the circumstances, therequirements of due process involved recourse to an impartial medical examinationof the applicant to ascertain the extent, if any, of his disability before recommendingto the Secretary-General the rejection of the request for re-opening the case. TheTribunal therefore held that the recommendation of the Advisory Board was vitiatedby lack of due process and that the Secretary-General's decision based on that recom-mendation suffered from the same infirmity. It therefore concluded that the caseshould be remanded for carrying out a proper medical examination of the applicant.

The applicant claimed that in view of the delay which would inevitably beinvolved in the re-opening of the case, the Tribunal should order payment to himof continuing compensation on the basis of article 11.2 (d) of Appendix D. TheTribunal observed, however, that the award of compensation for three years basedon certain premises mentioned earlier had concluded the applicant's right to compen-sation for service-incurred illness, subject to the procedure for amending the awardwith respect to future payments defined in article 9 of Appendix D.

The applicant also contended that as the respondent had not reinstated him,he should be deemed to have been terminated as being disabled from further serviceand should therefore be compensated. However, the Tribunal noted that the applicant'semployment status had been one of a fixed-term appointment which did not entitlehim to permanent or continuous service and that accordingly no inferences of disabilityfor further service could be drawn solely from the fact of his non-employment by theOrganization. The applicant further argued that if he was not considered disabled forfurther service, he should have been reinstated or re-employed by the respondent.The Tribunal found that, as the Advisory Board itself had informed him, the applicanthad had a legitimate expectancy of continuation in service but for his illness. However,it considered that it could draw no conclusion from that finding as long as it wasnot established that the applicant was incapacitated for further service by reason ofhis disability as contended by him.

The respondent having indicated on 22 April 1975 that he did not wish to requestremand of the case (see the fifth paragraph of the present summary), the Tribunaldecided to proceed to the determination of the merits of the case. It rescinded thedecision of the respondent not to re-open the case as being based on a recommendationwhich was vitiated by lack of due process and therefore being itself vitiated, and itordered the respondent to take action in conformity with the requirements of dueprocess, that is to say, in this case, by adopting a procedure analogous to that providedin article 17, paragraph ( b ) , of Appendix D.

The Tribunal recalled that it was required under article 9, paragraph 1, of itsStatute to fix the amount of compensation to be paid to the applicant should theSecretary-General, within 30 days of the notification of the judgement, decide, inthe interest of the United Nations, that the applicant should be compensated withoutfurther action. Considering the case to be an exceptional one, it fixed compensationat the equivalent of three years of net base salary.

With regard to the question of procedural delays, the Tribunal characterized asunconscionable the respondent's delays in the handling of the case. However, sinceboth sides were at fault in this matter it decided not to grant compensation for pro-cedural delays.

126

7. JUDGEMENT No. 201 (25 APRIL 1975) :10 BRANCKAERT v. UNITED NATIONS JOINTSTAFF PENSION BOARD

Application for rescission of a decision rejecting, on the ground of non-observanceof the prescribed time-limit, a request for validation of a period of service for pensionpurposes

The applicant, who had entered the service of FAO on 4 April 1965, receivedon 1 February 1970 an appointment which extended his total service to at least fiveyears, with the result that he became a participant in the United Nations Joint StaffPension Fund and had the option, by virtue of article 23 of the Regulations of theFund, of electing within one year to validate any prior service for pension purposes.On 27 February 1970, he signed the Participant's Declaration required by the Fund,at the bottom of which there appeared a notice inviting staff members who wishedto validate previous service to obtain the necessary forms and advising them thatthey must make their applications within the time-limits provided by the Regulations.The applicant, not having exercised the option to validate his prior service within thespecified time-limit, was informed, when he raised the question with the Secretary ofthe FAO Staff Pension Committee, that his application was time-barred.

The Tribunal, when the case was brought before it, noted that the contesteddecision was based on article 23 (a) of the Regulations, which prescribed that incertain circumstances "a participant may elect, within one year of the commencementof his participation, to validate prior service during which he was not e l igible . . . forparticipation". Despite the inclusion of the above-mentioned notice in the Participant'sDeclaration, for a year and a half the applicant had made no move. He stated thathe had not taken cognizance of the notice, even though it appeared on the very pagewhere he had signed a document which was extremely important not only for hisown interests but also for those of his dependants. In the view of the Tribunal, thenotice in question was sufficient to inform the applicant of the existence of time-limitsfor the submission of requests for validation of prior service, and he was not justifiedin blaming the respondent for the insufficiency of information which he invoked tojustify his failure to take action.

The applicant argued that, when in August 1971—i.e., after his application hadalready become time-barred—he had requested to be informed of the amounts stillto be paid by him in order to be up to date in the payment of his contribution to theFund, the Secretary had sent him a validation application form and invited him toreturn it, duly completed, as soon as possible. The applicant claimed that a logicalinterpretation of that correspondence had led him to believe that the period of priorservice could still be validated, i.e., that the time-limits allowed for doing so werestill open on 30 August 1971.

The Tribunal, however, took the view that the sending of a standard formdesigned to enable a staff member to submit an application could not, unless otherwiseindicated by a text or relevant practice, be considered equivalent to a decision by theorgan which communicated it or give rise to any expectation in the mind of the staffmember.

Lastly, the applicant maintained that the sole purpose of the time-limit was toencourage the staff member to act as quickly as possible and that the time-limit,being devised for the benefit of the staff member, could not be applied against him.The Tribunal recalled the principle that time-limits must be observed, with theexception of cases in which the competent authority has the power to extend them,

19 Mme P. Bastid, Vice-Président, presiding; Mr. Z. Rossides, Member; Mr. F. A. Forteza,Member.

127

and noted that the time-limit in question was imperative in character and that theRegulations of the Pension Fund did not confer on the competent organs the powerto extend it.

In view of the foregoing, the Tribunal rejected the application.

8. JUDGEMENT No. 202 (3 OCTOBER 1975) :20 QUEGUINER v. SECRETARY-GENERALOF THE INTER-GOVERNMENTAL MARITIME CONSULTATIVE ORGANIZATION

Application for an award of compensation, on the basis of the principle ofacquired rights, for reduction in the education grant received by the applicant inconsequence of an amendment to the Staff Rules—Scope ratione materiae and rationetemporis of the principle of acquired rights

The applicant entered the service of the Organization on 5 May 1968 under afixed-term contract of three years' duration, which on 5 May 1971 was extended fora duration of four years. On 29 July 1971, the Head of the Administrative Divisionannounced that the Secretary-General had decided, with effect from the scholasticyear 1971/72, to amend the staff rule relating to the education grant. As a result ofthis amendment, the applicant found that, instead of the flat $1,000 per year whichhe had received in the past, he was entitled to an amount equal to 75 per cent of thecost of attendance actually incurred by him, or approximately $650 per year. Thestaff rule in question was further amended in 1973, the maximum amount of theeducation grant being increased to $1,500. Following a complaint by the applicantthat the 1971 amendment was prejudicial to him, the Secretary-General decided, aftera review of the question and of the practice of other organizations of the UnitedNations system, to apply a transitional measure for the year 1971/72, as a result ofwhich the applicant received a further sum of approximately $350 for that year. Theapplicant, however, considered that measure inadequate.

The case was brought before the Tribunal, which first of all declared admissiblethree applications for intervention submitted by individuals whom the Tribunal foundto be prima facie in a situation similar to that of the applicant.

In his first plea, the applicant requested that the decision of 29 July 1971 shouldbe rescinded as contrary to the Staff Regulations in that it prejudiced the acquiredrights of the staff member. The Tribunal observed that, if such a request were granted,the judgement would have the effect of eliminating the staff rule in question in respectof all staff members, irrespective of the date on which they entered upon their duties.The plea requesting a decision with effect erga omnes was in contradiction with thevery basis of the request, which was grounded on the contractual situation of theapplicant and on respect for acquired rights. It must therefore be rejected.

The applicant also requested compensation for the years 1972/73 and 1973/74equal to the difference between the sums he had actually received and the new maximumof $1,500 introduced in 1973.

The Tribunal recognized that it followed from staff regulation 12 that theSecretary-General's power to amend the rules could only be properly exercised if theacquired rights of staff members were respected. The question posed by the presentcase was thus to determine whether the applicant had an acquired right to theeducation grant system as established at the time when he had entered upon hisduties.

The Tribunal noted in this connexion that the letter extending the applicant'sinitial appointment contained a number of provisions concerning the applicant

20 Mme P. Bastid, Vice-President, presiding; Mr. Z. Rossides, Member; Mr. MutnaleTshikankie, Member; Mr. F. A. Forteza, Alternate Member.

128

personally and referred to the conditions of employment and fundamental rights, andthe duties and obligations, laid down in the Staff Regulations and Staff Rules, "dueaccount being taken of any subsequent amendments to those texts".

The limitation of the right of amendment set out in staff regulation 12 obviouslyconcerned the rights of the staff member expressly stipulated in the contract. In itsJudgement No. 19,21 the Tribunal had stated that all matters were contractual whichaffected "the personal status of each member—e.g., nature of his contract, salary,grade". Respect for acquired rights also meant that the benefits and advantagesaccruing to a staff member from services rendered before the entry into force of anamendment could not be prejudiced. An amendment could not have an adverseretroactive effect in relation to a staff member, but nothing prevented an amendmentto the Staff Rules where the effects of such amendment applied only to benefits andadvantages accruing through service after the adoption of such amendment (Judge-ment No. 82).22

It did not seem to the Tribunal that the decision to amend the education grantsystem exceeded the powers accorded to the Organization in the contract acceptedby the applicant. The legality of comparable measures concerning the non-resident'sallowance (Judgement No. 5123) and the allowances payable under the definition ofdependency (Judgements Nos. 82 and HO24) had been recognized, and there seemedto be no valid reason for treating the education grant differently. The new systemwhich had been introduced was not unreasonable, and the Tribunal must confineitself to noting that the respondent was not obliged in law to pay compensation for areduction in the amount received by the applicant. The latter's claim to a flat-rategrant of $1,500 was entirely without merit, since the purpose of the 1973 amendmenthad not been to increase the flat rate for the education grant but to raise the maximumamount of the grant; the claim was all the less admissible in that the applicantappeared to be claiming the right to benefit by both the advantages of the system inforce prior to 1971 and the increase in the maximum amount decided on in 1973.

In any event, the applicant's claim could concern only the contractual relationsresulting from the contract accepted by him on 30 April 1971, i.e., the relationsrunning until 4 May 1975. The new system did not seem to have prevented him fromsubsequently agreeing to the renewal of his contract, which showed clearly that, sofar as the importance of that factor with respect to acceptance of the contract wasconcerned, the applicant's argument was unfounded.

In conclusion, the Tribunal decided that, in changing the bases for the compu-tation of the education grant, the Secretary-General had exercised the powers accordedhim by the Staff Regulations and that any reductions in the grant payable to theapplicant entailed no liability on the part of the Organization.

9. JUDGEMENT No. 203 (7 OCTOBER 1975):25 SEHGAL v. SECRETARY-GENERAL OFTHE UNITED NATIONS

Application requesting that a decision not to renew a fixed-term appointment bedeclared void—Criteria for determining whether the question of the renewal of such

21 Judgements of the United Nations Administrative Tribunal, Nos. 1 to 70 (AT/DEC/1-70—United Nations publication, Sales No. 58.X.1), p. 71.

22 Ibid., Nos. 71 to 86 (AT/DEC/71-86—United Nations publication, Sales No. 63.X.1),p. 78.

Îbid., Nos. 1 to 70 (AT/DEC/1-70—United Nations publication, Sales No. 58.X.1),p. 247.

24 See Juridical Yearbook, 1967, p. 297.25 Mr. R. Venkataraman, President; Mr. F. T. P. Plimpton, Vice-Président; Sir Roger

Stevens, Member.

129

an appointment was duly considered and whether actions taken following a rebuttalof a periodic report constitute an appropriate investigation

The applicant had been recruited for an initial period of three months and hisappointment had been renewed on several occasions—first for four months and thenfor two successive periods of one year. Upon assuming his duties, he had beenassured that, when the time came, his case would be duly considered for an extensionof his fixed-term contract or for an indefinite appointment. He was not satisfied withhis first periodic report—prepared 26 months after his entry on duty—and submitteda rebuttal of it, requesting that an inquiry be held. The Resident Representativetransmitted the report in question and the rebuttal to Headquarters and wrote a letterto the applicant in which he criticized his "egotism", his "scorn for the contributionof virtually all [his] colleagues" and his "immaturity", and rejected his request foran inquiry. Following a discussion which he held a few weeks later with the applicantand his immediate superiors, the Resident Representative confirmed that he did notplan to alter the periodic report in question. The applicant then asked the Chief ofthe Personnel Division at Headquarters to hold the inquiry which he had previouslyrequested. The next day, the Resident Representative sent the applicant a detailedreply to his rebuttal and enclosed a copy thereof in a letter to Headquarters recom-mending that the applicant's contract should not be renewed. That recommendationwas followed by the Headquarters departments concerned.

The case was referred to the Tribunal, which considered that it had to decidethe following two issues:

(i) Whether due consideration had been given to the continued employmentof the applicant in accordance with the undertaking given at the time ofhis entry on duty;

(ii) Whether the requisite procedures to deal with the rebuttal by the applicantof the adverse criticisms contained in his periodic report had been compliedwith.

As to (i), the Tribunal noted the respondent's contention that the applicant hadat each renewal of his contract received the consideration contemplated. In theTribunal's view, however, it did not follow that the respondent had been ipso factoabsolved from all need to give due consideration to the decision not to renew whenthat decision had been taken.

With regard to (ii), the Tribunal considered that the key issue to be determinedwas not so much what particular instruction applied (a matter on which there was aconflict of view) nor whether what took place was or was not an investigation, aswhether the action taken was appropriate to the particular circumstances of the case.In that connexion, the Tribunal noted that, beginning with the periodic report, thequestion of the investigation of the applicant's rebuttal, on the one hand, and thequestion of due consideration of the renewal of his contract, on the other, had becomeintertwined. It was therefore necessary for the Tribunal to consider at that pointwhether the actions of the respondent had been appropriate to an investigation of theapplicant's rebuttal on the one hand and to due consideration being given to renewal(or non-renewal) of his contract on the other.

In that connexion, the Tribunal stated the following:

"... an investigation of a rebuttal by a Head of Department or his equivalentcalls for a balanced regard for the conflicting views of the staff member and hissupervisors, a dispassionate approach to the issues standing between them, asearch for additional evidence or opinions which may throw further light ontheir respective viewpoints, and a clear and reasoned determination. Due consid-

130

eration of renewal of contract would appear to the Tribunal to require at leastthat the arguments for and against renewal should be objectively weighed andin the event of an adverse decision the reasons for such decision clearly set out."

In the opinion of the Tribunal, whichever of the foregoing criteria was applied,the actions of the respondent fell short of the requirements set out above and alsorevealed a singular lack of objectivity which had resulted in the applicant being denieddue process.

Having concluded that the applicant had not been given due consideration forfurther employment, contrary to the undertaking given to him, and that there hadbeen no objective investigation of the rebuttal of his report, the Tribunal ordered thatcompensation equivalent to six months' net base salary be awarded to the applicant forthe injury sustained by him.26

10. JUDGEMENT No. 204 (8 OCTOBER 1975) :27 MILA v. SECRETARY-GENERAL OFTHE UNITED NATIONS

Application directed against a decision to terminate following a correction ofprocedure ordered by the Tribunal—Conclusions of the Tribunal regarding theprocedure followed for the reconsideration of the case and regarding the regularityof the contested decision—Reparation of the damage sustained by the applicantbecause of the administrative errors committed during the period preceding histermination

In its Judgement No. 184,28 the Tribunal had stated that the decision to terminatethe applicant's appointment following the five-year review of his permanent contracthad not been preceded by a complete, fair and reasonable procedure and had remandedthe case for correction of the procedure. Consequently, the applicant's case had beenresubmitted to the Appointment and Promotion Panel and, pursuant to the Panel'srecommendations, the Secretary-General had decided to maintain the decison con-cerning termination.

The applicant submitted a further request for rescission to the Tribunal, whichhad to consider, firstly, the conditions in which the Appointment and Promotion Panelhad reconsidered the applicant's case and the basis for the conclusions of its reportand, secondly, the decision taken by the respondent following that new report, takinginto account the provisions of the Staff Regulations and Rules relating to the five-yearreview of permanent contracts.

The applicant contended, in the first place, that the respondent had ignored anelementary and basic rule concerning disqualification by including in the 1974 Panelfour members of the 1972 Panel, especially a member against whom the applicant'scounsel had certain grievances dating back about 20 years. The Tribunal neverthelessconsidered that, in the absence of legal provisions, the composition of a purelyadministrative body whose task was to advise the Secretary-General fell within hisown competence. No general legal principle compelled the Secretary-General toexclude a given person, at least in so far as the procedural defects noted were not

26 An application for a review of Judgement No. 203 was submitted to the Committeeon Applications for Review of Administrative Tribunal Judgements, established underarticle 11 of the Statute of the Tribunal. The Committee indicated in its report (A/AC.86/20) that it had decided without a vote that there was not a substantial basis for the ap-plication under article 11 of the Statute and that it had therefore concluded that theInternational Court of Justice should not be requested to give an advisory opinion.

27 Mme P. Bastid, Vice-Président, presiding; Mr. F. A. Forteza, Member; Sir RogerStevens, Member.

28 See Juridical Yearbook, 1974, p. 109.

131

related to the conduct of that person; in the case under consideration, the Tribunalhad not attributed the short-comings which it had noted in its Judgement No. 184to reasons peculiar to the members of the Panel. The fact that the 1974 Panel comprisedfour members of the 1972 Panel therefore could not affect the validity of the decisiontaken by the respondent pursuant to the report of the 1974 Panel.

The applicant also contended that the conduct of the Joint Appeals Board (towhich the case had been submitted before being referred to the Tribunal) demonstratedprejudice against him. The Tribunal observed, however, that the applicant was notrequesting that the case be remanded to the Board; in addition, it noted that, sincethe respondent had accepted direct recourse to the Tribunal, the question of thelegality of the conduct of the Joint Appeals Board did not arise.

With regard to the errors of fact and law which the applicant contended vitiatedthe contested decision, the Tribunal noted that the applicant's complaints had not beenbased on the precise terms of the report of the 1974 Panel and had not establishedpoints on which the report in question was so inadequate as to permit the statementthat the review conducted did not represent the "complete, fair and reasonable pro-cedure which must be carried out prior to the termination of a permanent appointment".In the light of its own findings in the case and the questions it had deemed necessaryto have elucidated, the Tribunal reached the conclusion that the proceedings beforethe 1974 Panel had enabled the Panel to carry out a thorough, searching and balancedreview of the applicant's standards during the flve-year review of his permanent contract.

Turning to the decision taken by the respondent consequent upon the Panel'sreport, the Tribunal noted that the Panel had "agreed that the staff member's perform-ance and attitude had been less satisfactory than earlier" and had recognized that theapplicant "had not, in the strict sense, met the full standards for a permanent appoint-ment" but had, on the other hand, considered that "the administrative decision notto renew the staff member's permanent appointment, and in consequence to separatehim from service, was too drastic". Notwithstanding the latter formula, the Tribunaldid not find it possible to state that the contested decision contradicted the dossier,for the latter also contained the finding that the applicant had not, "in the strict sense,met the full standards for a permanent appointment". It considered that, in view ofthe power of evaluation which the respondent must be recognized to possess, it couldnot order the rescission of a decision on the basis of an equivocal formula. Theapplicant also claimed that the procedure of reviewing his permanent contract con-cealed a disciplinary measure so that it would be subject to less strict rules. In theview of the Tribunal, however, the applicant did not base his argument on any precisefact that could justify a disciplinary measure against him; it was the way in whichhe had performed his duties which had given rise to criticism. In those circumstances,the Tribunal considered that no misuse of procedure that could entail the rescissionof the contested decision could be imputed to the respondent.

The Tribunal noted, on the other hand, that the Panel had found that there werelapses in procedure and administrative short-comings in the handling of the case priorto the 1972 review; it also found, in the light of the conclusions of the 1974 Panel'sreport, that the 1972 Panel's report had serious defects, as had been shown in Judge-ment No. 184, and did not correspond to what could normally be expected as a resultof an administrative procedure of that type, so that the treatment of the applicant inthe period preceding his termination had not been in conformity with the administrativerules in force or the basic principles of good administration. Nothing in the contesteddecision indicated that the respondent contested the views on that subject expressedby the Panel in its report.

132

Considering that the administrative short-comings mentioned above could notbe remedied retroactively, the Tribunal awarded the applicant compensation of 15,000Swiss francs.

11. JUDGEMENT No. 205 (9 OCTOBER 1975) :29 EL-NAGGAR v. SECRETARY-GENERALOF THE UNITED NATIONS

Application contesting a decision not to renew a fixed-term appointment—Obliga-tions of the respondent arising from his "acceptance" of a recommendation by the JointAppeals Board that he should seek to keep the applicant on the staff and should offerhim a new and appropriate appointment

The applicant, after several periods of service at the P-5 and later the D-llevel, for which he received excellent periodic reports, was given a five-year contractextension on 1 March 1970; on 1 June 1971, he was promoted to D-2 and transferredto the United Nations Economic and Social Office in Beirut (UNESOB) as Director.On the establishment of the Economic Commission for Western Asia (ECWA), whichwas to consist of the States then covered by UNESOB and was to start its operationson 1 January 1974, the Secretary-General was obliged to find a new assignment forthe applicant, since the Governments concerned wanted the Executive Secretary ofthe new Commission to be from a country belonging to the geographic scope of theCommission.

Efforts to reassign the applicant were of no avail until 13 May 1974, when hewas transferred to UNCTAD for a period which was to end on the expiration dateof his appointment. On 16 September 1974, the applicant requested that the decisionconcerning his transfer should be reviewed so that ( 1 ) he would be given an establishedpost of such rank and responsibility as to be equal to his former post in UNESOBand (2) his assignment would be of the same duration as his former fixed-termappointment, i.e., for a period of five years.

The respondent refused this request but informed the Joint Appeals Board, towhich the case had been taken, that he was trying to find a post for the applicant.The Board found that the assignment of the applicant to UNCTAD was not a violationof any staff rules or regulations or the Charter, and that he was not entitled to anycompensation for damages; nevertheless, it recommended to the Secretary-General thatit would be in the best interest of the United Nations to seek to keep him on the staffand to offer him a new and appropriate appointment on the; expiry of his contract.This recommendation was accepted by the Secretary-General.

The Tribunal—to which the case was taken before the Secretary-General's decisionto act on the recommendation of the Joint Appeals Board had been communicated tothe applicant30—observed that the applicant had a fixed-term appointment which didnot carry any expectancy of renewal or of conversion to any other type of appointment,and that the recognition of his qualifications and abilities, however high they mightbe, did not by itself create a legal expectancy which imposed on the respondent anobligation to renew or extend his fixed-term appointment.

However, referring to its Judgements Nos. 9531 and 142,3!l the Tribunal proceededto consider the applicant's contract as a whole and examine the surrounding circum-

29 Mr. R. Venkataraman, President; Mme P. Bastid, Vice-Président; Sir Roger Stevens;Member.

30 Under the terms of articles 7, paragraph 2 (b), of the Statute of the Tribunal, anapplication is receivable if, as in this case, the Secretary-General has failed to take anyaction on the joint appeals body's recommendations within the 30' days following the com-munication of the opinion.

si See Juridical Yearbook, 1965, p. 207.**lbid., 1971, p. 152.

133

stances in order to ascertain whether a legal expectancy of renewal had been createdin this case. The Tribunal found that the respondent had at no stage held out to theapplicant any hope or promise that his contract would be renewed or extended. Italso observed that (1) the applicant had accepted a fixed-term appointment and wasnot, therefore, entitled to argue that the fixed-term appointment was in reality apermanent appointment; (2) the contention that the respondent's failure to appointthe applicant to any of the seven D-2 vacancies that had arisen between November1973 and February 1975 in the Department of Economic and Social Affairs of theUnited Nations and in UNCTAD was a breach of staff regulation 4.433 was notrelevant, since, even if the applicant had been appointed to one of those posts, hisfixed-term appointment would not thereby have been converted into a career appoint-ment; (3) the applicants complaint that in not assigning him to a post for fourmonths there had been a gross abuse of discretion or authority by the Secretary-General was unjustified, in view of the steps which the file showed had been takenby the respondent on behalf of the applicant; (4) while there were certain unsatis-factory features in the case, the fact that other actions had been favourable to theapplicant made the contention that there had been prejudice or abuse of discretion orauthority by the respondent unacceptable.

The Tribunal also considered whether acceptance of the Joint Appeals Board'srecommendation by the respondent simply meant that, on finding that the steps hehad taken previously were without positive results, the Secretary-General had felt thatthere was nothing more for him to do. The Tribunal believed that if that had beenhis intention the Secretary-General would have so stated categorically. On the otherhand, the file showed that the Secretary-General had accepted the recommendation ofthe Joint Appeals Board in respect both of keeping the applicant on the staff and ofoffering him a new and appropriate appointment on the expiry of his contract. TheTribunal accordingly found that the respondent had undertaken to fulfil the obligationsarising from the Board's recommendation and that it was for him to show that effortshad been made to keep the applicant on the staff and to place him in a suitableposition after the recommendation made by the Board.

The Tribunal noted in this connexion that the applicant had been offered threetechnical assistance posts but had not been given any details regarding the rank andemoluments of those posts; that being so, the Tribunal held that the offer of theposts in question did not conclude the respondent's obligation arising from the recom-mendation of the Joint Appeals Board. It accordingly ordered the respondent to makea fair and objective attempt to place the applicant in a suitable position within threemonths from the date of the judgement and, should he exercise his option of deciding,in the interest of the United Nations, that the applicant should be compensated, asprovided in article 9, paragraph 1, of the Statute of the Tribunal, to pay compensationequal to six months' base salary. Lastly, the Tribunal noted that part of the recom-mendation of the Joint Appeals Board, namely that the applicant should be kept onthe staff, had not been implemented; estimating that three months would normally benecessary for making a search for a suitable post at the D-2 level, the Tribunal awardedto the applicant three months' base salary.

33 Staff regulation 4.4 reads as follows:"Subject to the provisions of Article 101, paragraph 3, of the Charter, and without

prejudice to the recruitment of fresh talent at all levels, the fullest regard shall be had,in filling vacancies, to the requisite qualifications and experience of persons already in theservice of the United Nations. This consideration shall also apply on a reciprocal basisto the specialized agencies brought into relationship with the United Nations."

134

12. JUDGEMENT No. 206 (10 OCTOBER 1975):34 QUEGUINER v. SECRETARY-GENERALOF THE INTER-GOVERNMENTAL MARITIME CONSULTATIVE ORGANIZATION

Request for reimbursement of medical expenses submitted by a staff memberclaiming that, owing to a fault on the part of the respondent, he had been denied thebenefit of certain arrangements with respect to health insurance applicable in theEuropean Economic Community—Allegation that the impossibility of obtaining re-imbursement of the expenses in question demonstrated the inadequacy of the IMCOhealth insurance plan, an inadequacy for which the respondent should be held respon-sible

The applicant, a French national working in the United Kingdom, had incurredcertain medical expenses while in France for which he sought reimbursement from therespondent, claiming that upon the accession of the United Kingdom to the EuropeanEconomic Community, nationals of Community countries working for an employer inthe United Kingdom had been entitled, under the British National Health Service, tofree medical treatment for sickness or accident when they were staying temporarilyin a Community country, and that since he had been unable to benefit from those newarrangements because he had not been advised thereof in good time by the IMCOAdministration, he was justified in claiming compensation from the latter for theinjury sustained.

His request having been rejected, the applicant filed with the Tribunal an applica-tion requesting it to rescind the decision rejecting reimbursement and to award himcompensation equivalent to the injury sustained as a result of the failure to reimbursethe aforementioned medical expenses.

The Tribunal noted that an inquiry addressed to the competent British serviceshad revealed that IMCO staff who were not citizens of the United Kingdom andcolonies or permanently resident in the United Kingdom could not benefit under thereciprocity provided for in the provisions of the Community with regard to healthinsurance. The Tribunal therefore considered that the Organization could not beblamed for failing to take action with regard to an entitlement which did not exist.

The applicant also contended that the health insurance coverage available to theIMCO staff was defective in that their health protection was not ensured when theywere on holiday outside the United Kingdom. He therefore alleged that his inabilityto obtain reimbursement for the medical expenses claimed resulted from the negligenceof the Secretary-General and the Administration's non-performance of its duties.

The Tribunal noted, however, that the Secretary-General had made the necessaryarrangements with a private organization, the British United Provident Association(BUPA) for IMCO staff members to be covered by group medical insurance, thatthe Organization made a substantial contribution to the cost of that cover and thatbenefits under the BUPA group insurance scheme were payable for treatment for anillness during temporary visits outside the United Kingdom on the same conditions asthose applying in that country. When the applicant had reached the ceiling authorizedby BUPA, he undoubtedly had not been reimbursed for ail his medical expenses;however, it was difficult, if not impossible, to provide 100 per cent cover for all pos-sible risks in any social security system.

The Tribunal also noted that at the end of 1973 the Secretary-General hadobtained from the IMCO Assembly the funds needed to give the staff a choice be-tween the BUPA insurance system or another scheme. It had concluded from thefact that a sizable number of staff members had remained with BUPA that thatsystem was not patently inadequate.

34 Mme P. Bastid, Vice-Président, presiding; Mr. Z. Rossides, Member; Mr. F. A. Forteza,Member; Mr. Mutuale Tshikankie, Alternate Member.

135

Lastly, the Tribunal recalled that in its Judgement No. 18235 it had stated thatin pension matters the respondent would be contractually liable if, "through his actionor omission, a staff member's participation in the Pension Fund were to lose anypractical significance or if the effects of such action or omission were so contrary togeneral principles of law applicable to pensions as to render the very notion of pensionmeaningless". The Tribunal considered that the same principle applied by analogyto the present case. It could not see in the refusal at issue an infringement of theapplicant's right to health insurance for which the respondent could be held liable andconcluded that the applicant's allegations that he had sustained injury as a result ofnegligence on the part of the respondent were without foundation.

13. JUDGEMENT No. 207 (10 OCTOBER 1975):36 SQUADRILLI v. SECRETARY-GENERALOF THE UNITED NATIONS

Application filed by a United States staff member who was not exempt fromtaxes on his United Nations salaries and emoluments owing to the reservation madeby the United States to section 18 (b) of the Convention on the Privileges and Immu-nities of the United Nations37—System of reimbursement established to prevent staffmembers in the applicant's situation from being at a disadvantage vis-à-vis theircolleagues of other nationalities—Methods of calculating the amount which is reim-bursable—Rejection, as purely conjectural and incompatible with the obligations flowingfrom the Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the United Nations, of therespondent's allegations concerning the provisions which the United States would havetaken had it not entered the aforementioned reservation

The applicant, a United States staff member working in Switzerland had, like allhis compatriots, been denied the benefits of section 18 (6) of the Convention on thePrivileges and Immunities of the United Nations38 owing to the reservation entered bythe United States when it acceded to the Convention on 29 April 1970.39 His entireincome—including the salaries and emoluments received from the United Nations—was therefore subject to the United States income tax and he accordingly had paid theUnited States tax authorities a sum of approximately $22,000 for 1973. Under thesystem established to prevent staff members in his situation from being at a disadvantagevis-à-vis their colleagues of other nationalities, the applicant was entitled to reim-bursement from the Organization of the difference between the total amount of taxcalculated on the basis of his total annual income, including his United Nationsearnings, and the amount of the tax which would have been payable had those earningsbeen excluded. The applicant had calculated the reimbursable amount for 1973 to beapproximately $9,300, and the Organization had calculated the amount at approxi-mately $6,000.

The case was brought before the Tribunal, which stated, firstly, that the purposeof the reimbursement system described above was, as provided in the relevantAdministrative Circular, to place a staff member who is subject to taxation "in theposition that he would be in if his Government had acceded to section 18 (b) of the

55 Juridical Yearbook, 1974, p. 107.36 Mr. R. Venkataraman, President; Mr. F. T. P. Plimpton, Vice-Président; Mr. F. A.

Forteza, Member.37 United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. I, p. 15.38 Section 18 (b) provides that "Officials of the United Nations shall... be exempt from

taxation on the salaries and emoluments paid to them by the United Nations".39 The reservation reads as follows:

"Paragraph (6) of section 18 regarding immunity from taxation... shall notapply with respect to United States nationals and aliens admitted for permanent resi-dence" (United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 725, p. 362, and Juridical Yearbook, 1970,p. 27, foot-note 3).

136

Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the United Nations". The Tribunalhad gone on to note that in 1971 and 1972 the applicant's income from the UnitedNations had been less than $25,000 and that, since that amount of income earnedabroad by a bona fide resident abroad was excluded from United States taxable incomeby Internal Revenue Code section 911, he was entitled to no reimbursement fromthe United Nations and had applied for none. In the tax year 1973 the applicant hadrealized an unusually large capital gain from sources other rJhan the United Nationsand had paid United States federal income tax of nearly $22,300 on taxable incomeof approximately $60,000.

The applicant had the option under the United States Internal Revenue Codeto compute his tax under the "income averaging method"—according to which histax for the "computation" year was in effect based, subject to various adjustments,on an averaging of his taxable income for the "computation year" with his taxableincome for the four preceding years. One might have expected the applicant to haveutilized that option, since his taxable income for 1973 had greatly exceeded histaxable income for each of the base period years. However, the Tribunal noted, ataxpayer using the income averaging method was required by the Internal RevenueCode to include in the taxable income of each of the five years all the income earnedby him abroad which was ordinarily excluded from taxable income by virtue of the$25,000-exclusion mentioned above. The applicant therefore had not applied theincome averaging method since the total taxes he would then have had to pay forthe period 1969-1973 would have exceeded the amount he had actually paid for 1973by applying the other method.

However, in the notional tax return which he, like any staff member in hissituation, was required to file—in addition to his tax return for the United States taxauthorities—for purposes of calculating the amount reimbursable by the UnitedNations, the applicant had used the income averaging method to determine thenotional income tax and had reached the conclusion that the United Nations owedhim a refund of $9,300. The respondent conceded that income averaging could beused but contended that the applicant should have included United Nations incomein the calculations, which the applicant had not done. The respondent's contentionwas based on the provisions of the Internal Revenue Code mentioned above, whichprovided that in income averaging there must be included, in the income of the yearsinvolved, foreign earned income, up to $25,000 a year of which was ordinarily excludedfrom taxable income. The Tribunal stated the following regarding this arrangement:

"Needless to say, [the Internal Revenue Code] contains no such provisionas to including income from the United Nations in the averaging process, andthe Applicant's notional income averaging return was compiled in strict accordancewith [the relevant] Information Circular... and in strict accordance with theInternal Revenue Code as applied to his non-United Nations income.

"The respondent argues in effect that the purpose of the United Nationsrefunding procedure is to place a United States citizen in the same position hewould be in if the United States had acceded to the Immunities Convention,thereby exempting income from the United Nations from taxation, and that ifthe United States had so acceded it would have provided that income from theUnited Nations would have to be included in income averaging. This is pureconjecture, and irrelevant as regards a notional return which precisely complieswith the [above-mentioned] Information Circular, prepared by the respondentand binding upon him.

»

"If the United States were to accede to the Immunities Convention withoutreservation, income from the United Nations would, by treaty, be completely

137

exempt from United States income tax, and it would presumably be a violationof that treaty if tax exempt income were to be included in any income averagingcalculation—since such inclusion would have the effect of increasing the tax-payer's tax. In point is the memorandum of the Legal Counsel of the UnitedNations, dated 16 October 1969, directed to the Director of the Accounts Divi-sion, Office of the Controller (United Nations Juridical Yearbook, 1969, p. 226),holding that a Member State which is a party to the Immunities Convention maynot take income received by a United Nations staff member from the UnitedNations into account in establishing the rate of tax on the staff member's non-exempt income; to do so would make the exempt income part of the legal basefor taxation, which would constitute taxation on United Nations salaries forbiddenby the Immunities Convention. The memorandum points out that UNESCO hastaken the same position and that the Court of Justice of the European Com-munities has held likewise with respect to the virtually identical language of theProtocol on the Privileges and Immunities of the European Coal and Steel Com-munity.

"The respondent's conjectures as to what the United States might do if itwere to adhere to the Immunities Convention without reservation are thereforenot only irrelevant but contrary to what would be the legal position."The Tribunal consequently found that the respondent was required to reimburse

the applicant the disputed sum—approximately $3,300—plus interest at the rate payableunder the Internal Revenue Code.

B. Decisions of the Administrative Tribunal of theInternational Labour Organisation40- 41

1. JUDGEMENT No. 248 (5 MAY 1975): NOWAKOVSKI v. WORLD METEOROLOGICALORGANIZATION

Complaint against a decision to terminate a permanent appointment for un-satisfactory services

40 The Administrative Tribunal of the International Labour Organisation is competentto hear complaints alleging non-observance, in substance or in form, of the terms ofappointment, and of such provisions of the Staff Regulations as are applicable to the case,of officials of the International Labour Office and of officials of the international organ-izations that have recognized the competence of the Tribunal, namely, as at 31 December1973, the World Health Organization (including the Pan American Health Organization(PAHO)), the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, theInternational Telecommunication Union, the World Meteorological Organization, the Foodand Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, the European Organization for NuclearResearch, the Interim Commission for the International Trade Organization/General Agree-ment on Tariffs and Trade, the International Atomic Energy Agency, the World IntellectualProperty Organization, the European Organization for the Safety of Air Navigation, theUniversal Postal Union, the International Patent Institute, the European Southern Observ-atory, the Intergovernmental Council of Copper Exporting Countries, the European FreeTrade Association and the Inter-Parliamentary Union. The Tribunal is also competent tohear disputes with regard to the execution of certain contracts concluded by the InternationalLabour Office and disputes relating to the application of the Regulations of the former StaffPensions Fund of the International Labour Organisation.

The Tribunal is open to any official of the International Labour Office and of theabove-mentioned organizations, even if his employment has ceased, and to any person onwhom the official's rights have devolved on his death, and to any other person who canshow that he is entitled to some right under the terms of appointment of a deceased officialor under provisions of the Staff Regulations on which the official could rely.

41 Mr. M. Letourneur, President; Mr. A. Grisel, Vice-Président; Lord Devlin, Judge.

138

The complaint impugned the decision of the Secretary-General of the Organ-ization to terminate her permanent contract on the grounds of unsatisfactory services.On the grounds that a medical board had recognized that she was suffering from totaldisability, she maintained that the impugned decision was based on an error ofjudgement and of law; she also contended that the proper procedural safeguards hadnot been respected.

The Tribunal found that the complainant had received several warnings that ifher services did not improve, the Organization would feel bound to dismiss her; shecould not therefore properly maintain that she was dismissed suddenly, without warningand in ignorance of the reasons for dismissal. Moreover, she had had every opportunityto examine all the documents in her file and to submit her case, and had thus enjoyedall the formal and procedural safeguards stipulated by the terms of her appointmentand general principles of law.

As for the real reason for the decision to dismiss her, the Tribunal found that itappeared clearly from the complainant's medical examinations that she was not unfitfor work, as indeed she had consistently maintained until her dismissal. Furthermore,the Organization had consistently contended that the complainant had done nothingto warrant disciplinary action. On the other hand, it was clear from the file that inher successive assignments she had shown incompetence. The Organization had actedlawfully in invoking unsatisfactory services as grounds for the decision of dismissal.The Tribunal consequently dismissed the complaint.

2. JUDGEMENT No. 249 (5 MAY 1975): NOWAKOVSKI v. WORLD METEOROLOGICALORGANIZATION

Complaint against a decision to dismiss a request for reconsideration of a claimfor compensation for illness attributable to the performance of official duties—Discretionary power of the Secretary-General in his exercise of the right conferredupon him by article 9 of the Statute of the Administrative Tribunal

The complainant had made a claim for compensation for illness attributable tothe performance of her official duties and that claim was rejected. She subsequentlysubmitted a request for reconsideration of her case producing, as a "new fact" whichwould enable the procedure for the reopening of cases in accordance with article 9of appendix D of the Staff Rules to be instituted, a medical report which found thather disability was attributable to the performance of her official duties at WMO.Having examined the report in question, the medical adviser of the internationalorganizations stated that there was no new fact which warranted reopening the caseand the Secretary-General dismissed the above-mentioned request.

The Tribunal noted that the decision which the complainant was seeking to havereconsidered had not been the subject of an appeal to the Administrative Tribunal withinthe statutory time-limits and was no longer open to appeal unless there was a petitionfor review and unless the Secretary-General exercised his power to reopen the case.The Tribunal found, first, that the complainant was putting forward no argument towarrant a petition for review, which was an exceptional form of legal redress, and,secondly, that, in view of the terms of article 942 of appendix D to the Staff Rules andof the principle that final administrative decisions might not be interfered with, theexceptional power conferred on the Secretary-General by the article in question was a

42 That article reads as follows:'The Secretary-General, on his own initiative or upon the request of a person

entitled to or claiming to be entitled to compensation under these rules, may reopenany case under these rules, and may, where the circumstances so warrant, amend inaccordance with these rules any previous award with respect to future payments."

139

purely discretionary power. In the case before it, the report produced as a "new fact"was based solely on the complainant's own statements and in so far as the facts onwhich it was based were correct they had been known when the Secretary-Generaltook his decision. Since the impugned decision was not vitiated by any of the defectswhich the Tribunal is empowered to censure when it has cognizance of a decision madein exercise of the discretionary authority of its author, the Tribunal dismissed thecomplaint.

3. JUDGEMENT No. 250 (5 MAY 1975): REDING v. UNIVERSAL POSTAL UNION

Complaint against a decision denying the applicability of the benefits providedfor in appendix D of the Staff Rules to the holder of a contract containing a provisionon compensation in the event of illness

The complainant, a technical assistance expert with a fixed-term appointment, hadduring the period of his employment suffered a myocardial infarction. His letter ofappointment had stipulated that if he fell ill, he would be entitled to the compensationprescribed under the special insurance scheme applied by UPU to experts on technicalassistance projects.

Before the Tribunal, the complainant maintained, first, that apart from the benefitsto which he was entitled under his contract in the event of illness, he could availhimself of the provisions of appendix D of the Staff Rules and, secondly, that heshould be granted further compensation because his illness had been caused by abnormalfatigue attributable to the conditions in which he had had to work.

As to his first contention, the Tribunal held that the benefits prescribed in thecomplainant's contract in the event of illness clearly excluded those set out in ap-pendix D of the Staff Rules.

As to his second contention, the Tribunal noted that it was debatable whetherthe relevant clause of the contract applied to all cases of illness contracted during hisperiod of service, whatever their nature or origin, or should be taken to apply onlyto illness directly attributable to the performance of his duties by reason of their partic-ularly demanding nature. It found that, assuming that the latter interpretation wascorrect, the complainant would be entitled, apart from the benefits prescribed in hiscontract and in accordance with the general principles of liability in public law, tofull compensation for any injury suffered by him and its direct consequences, such aspermanent or temporary disability.

Assuming in the complainant's favour that the second interpretation was correct,the Tribunal noted that the heart specialist in the complainant's Administration hadfound that the duties performed had a bearing on his illness only in so far as hisallegation that he was overworked could be proved. In the Tribunal's opinion, thedocuments showed that the complainant's duties, however demanding and difficultthey might have been, had not in themselves required him regularly to work longerhours than might reasonably have been expected of a staff member in a managerialposition. Moreover, the illness in question had left no mark on him and had not pre-vented him from resuming his normal work in his national Administration or, indeed,from obtaining promotion. The complainant had therefore suffered no injury whichmight entitle him to claim compensation over and above the expenses already defrayedby UPU.

4. JUDGEMENT No. 251 (5 MAY 1975): DE SANCTIS v. FOOD AND AGRICULTUREORGANIZATION OF THE UNITED NATIONS

Complaint against a decision to reject the application for a permanent post of aperson who had worked for the Organization for several years on fixed-term appoint-

140

ments—Limits of the Tribunal's power to interfere with such a decision and with adecision not to renew a fixed-term appointment

The complainant, who had worked for several years in FAO on fixed-term ap-pointments, applied for a permanent post. Having failed to obtain it, he appealed tothe Director-General against the decision to appoint someone else to the vacant post.As the decision was confirmed, the complainant appealed to the FAO Appeals Com-mittee, which recommended that the Organization should reconsider the complainant'ssituation in order to determine whether he could not be given a permanent post and,failing that, that he should be paid a larger sum that the ex gratia payment of fivemonths' salary already offered to him. The Director-General decided not to acceptthose recommendations.

The Tribunal, when the case came before it, held that, contrary to the Organiza-tion's submission, it was required to rule on both the decision not to renew the fixed-term appointment and the decision not to appoint the complainant to the permanentpost for which he had applied. It noted that the internal appeal had related to both ques-tions and that, since the internal means of redress had thus been exhausted, the com-plaint was receivable on both points.

The Tribunal observed that a decision not to extend a fixed-term appointmentor not to convert it into an indefinite appointment fell within the Director-General'sdiscretionary authority and could therefore be quashed only if it had been taken withoutauthority, violated a rule of form or procedure or was based on an error of fact/orof law, or if essential facts had not been taken into consideration, if it was taintedby abuse of authority or if a clearly mistaken conclusion had been drawn from thefacts. In the opinion of the Tribunal, none of those defects existed in the case inquestion.

A decision not to appoint a staff member to a vacant post was also discretionaryand hence was not subject to interference by the Tribunal as a rule unless one of thedefects mentioned in the preceding paragraph existed. The complainant's main argu-ment was that he had served in FAO longer than the staff member who had in factbeen appointed and, unlike him, had a university degree. The Tribunal observed, how-ever, that length of service and educational qualifications were not the sole criteria;the most important one was fitness for the vacant post. The complainant's work hadnot always been fully satisfactory, whereas the successful candidate had been trainedfor the duties of the vacant post and had proved himself fully fit to perform them.In the circumstances, even though the decision might be open to question, the Director-General had not drawn any clearly false conclusions from the file.

The Tribunal therefore dismissed the complaint.

5. JUDGEMENT No. 252 (5 MAY 1975): ROUTIER v. WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION

Complaint seeking regrading of a post at a higher level on the basis of the dutiesassociated with the said post—Limits of the Tribunal's power to interfere with decisionsin the matter made by the Director-General on the basis of the Staff Manual

The complainant, employed as a messenger at grade G-2, submitted to the Tri-bunal a complaint in which he maintained that he was wrongly being described andpaid as a messenger when the duties assigned to him in official documents were clearlythose of a door-keeper, i.e. duties to which, in accordance with the Staff Manual inforce in 1973, G-3 grading was applicable.

The Tribunal observed that it was for the competent body and, ultimately, theDirector-General to grade each staff member. In all cases grading a post required

141

close familiarity with the conditions in which the incumbent worked and thereforeconstituted a discretionary decision with which the Tribunal could not in general inter-fere unless it was tainted with clearly proven defects.

The complainant contended that as a messenger he had to perform the duties ofa conference door-keeper (G-3 category) and consequently should have the samegrade as the conference door-keepers. The Tribunal found, however, that among theduties assigned to the complainant under his post description, some (preparing meetingrooms and posting announcements of meetings) differed neither in nature nor in im-portance from the function assigned in the Staff Manual to messengers, namely, keepingmeeting rooms in order. The other duties (co-ordination with other units and assistingthe door-keeper in charge) were not covered by the definition in the Manual; however,in the opinion of the Tribunal, they were not sufficient to justify grading messengersat G-3, because they accounted for only a small part of a messenger's duties and,secondly, because they were performed by the messenger under the supervision of adoor-keeper and therefore justified the difference in grade between the two categoriesof staff members.

The Tribunal concluded that not only was the complainant's argument unfoundedbut there was no reason to suppose that in taking the impugned decision the Director-General had exceeded or abused his discretionary authority. The Tribunal consequentlydismissed the complaint.

6. JUDGEMENT No. 253 (5 MAY 1975): JIMENEZ v. PAN AMERICAN HEALTH ORGAN-IZATION (PAHO) (WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION)

The Tribunal recorded the withdrawal of suit by the complainant and awardedher $520 to meet the costs of filing her complaint.

7. JUDGEMENT No. 254 (5 MAY 1975): GLYNN v. WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION

Complaint seeking to have periodic reports declared null and void—Purpose ofperiodic reports under the Staff Rules—Circumstances in which the Tribunal mayendorse an allegation of bias against a supervisor

The complainant asked the Tribunal, inter alia, to find null and void two periodicreports, one reading "work satisfactory" and the other containing the following state-ment: "As in previous reports, Dr. Glynn's experience and qualifications as a publichealth administrator are not questioned. However, Dr. Glynn's independent attitudetowards the Regional Director, and his tendency to question or to criticize the instruc-tions he is given are perturbing factors.".

The complainant asked the Tribunal to find that the reports in question had notbeen formulated in accordance with the Staff Rules. He argued that the statementquoted above did not conform to the requirements of Staff Rule 430.2, according towhich the purpose of periodic reports was to make "a formal evaluation of [the staffmember's] performance and conduct and potentialities". The Tribunal, however, heldthat the words complained of should not be read literally but were to be taken tomean that the supervisor, except in the two respects specified, had no fault to find.The Tribunal added that it would not normally entertain complaints about the contentsof periodic reports unless they showed a total misconception of the situation, whichwas not so in the case in question. The entry "work satisfactory" was an appraisal,and if the complainant had considered it inadequate, he had been at liberty to attacha statement to that effect. As for the allegation by the complainant that his supervisorhad failed to discuss the content of periodic reports with him, the Tribunal found that

142

non-compliance with the requirements on that subject did not ipso facto invalidatethe reports.

The complainant also contended that the impugned reports had been prepared bya supervisor disqualified on the grounds of insufficient knowledge of the facts andpersonal prejudice. The Tribunal observed that in its Judgement No. 182 concerning theperiodic report for the year 1968-1969 on the same complainant by the same super-visor,43 it had found that there had been no act or omission by the complainant tojustify the criticism made in the said report that he had failed to act in accordancewith the instructions drawn up in the Regional Office. Given that misjudgement, itwas possible that the supervisor had again erred in making a similar criticism in thenext periodic report on the complainant, but there was nothing to show that he had notexpressed his honest opinion. For the Tribunal to interfere in the case of a periodicreport, it was not enough to prove the existence of a preconceived opinion in the mindof the writer of the report, it also had to be shown that he had been actuated bymalice.

As to the allegation that the writer of the periodic reports had insufficient know-ledge of the facts, the Tribunal found that the impugned appraisal was not necessarilyirrelevant because its author had not visited the complainant's field of operations; evenif that had been the case, the complainant would have been well advised to make thatpoint in a statement attached to the report.

8. JUDGEMENT No. 255 (5 MAY 1975): GLYNN v. WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION

Receivability of a complaint made directly to the Tribunal under article VII, para-graph 3, of the Statute of the Tribunal

The complainant, a retired staff member, had requested a periodic report coveringthe last 11 months of his employment. With a covering letter dated 23 January 1974,he received a report worded "Work acceptable". In the belief that it was not a properreport, he had asked in a letter dated 20 March 1974 that his services should beevaluated by a qualified staff member who was not hostile towards him. He hadreceived a reply that note had been taken of his letter.

The Tribunal noted that the complaint was based on article VII, paragraph 3, ofthe Statute of the Tribunal, which provides that where the administration fails to takea decision upon any claim of an official within sixty days from the notification of theclaim to it, the persons concerned may have recourse to the Tribunal. The Organiza-tion's contention appeared to be that a letter dated 23 January 1974 constituted adecision which the complainant should have challenged under the internal appeal pro-cedures. But, in the view of the Tribunal, that letter was not expressed as a decisionbut as a letter enclosing a periodic report. The complainant had claimed what hecalled a proper report; he was within his rights in taking this course, and since theDirector-General had failed to act upon his letter of 20 March, paragraph 3 of arti-cle VII of the Statute applied and the complaint was receivable.

The Tribunal, nevertheless, dismissed the claim on the merits. If the Staff Ruleconcerning periodic reports was applicable to a staff member who had retired—andthat was by no means certain—there could be no relief for a breach of it except bythe payment of compensation, and it could not reasonably be claimed that the state-ment that the complainant's work during his last 11 months was acceptable could bein any way injurious to him.


143

9. JUDGEMENT No. 256 (5 MAY 1975): CONWAY v. INTERNATIONAL LABOURORGANISATION

Issue by the Organisation of an attestation concerning a staff member — Powerof the Tribunal to decide on the legality of such an act — Obligation of the Organ-isation, except in special cases, to advise the staff member concerned before providinginformation concerning him — Categories of documents to be placed by the Organ-isation in the personal file of staff members — Latitude allowed to the Organisationwith regard to certain confidential documents

The complainant complained that, in connexion with his divorce, the Organ-isation (1) issued to his former wife's lawyer an attestation containing informationon his conditions of employment and his personal life, thereby violating, in his view,Staff Regulation 4.12; and (2) failed to place the said attestation in his personal file,thereby, in his view, again violating Staff Regulation 4.12. Furthermore, he objectedto the establishment of confidential files concerning him.

On the first claim, the Tribunal rejected the Organisation's argument that theissue of an attestation did not constitute a decision and could not therefore beimpugned before the Tribunal. It observed that the complainant had disputed theright of the Organisation to issue such an attestation and that the Organisation hadrejected the complainant's claim in several successive letters, including a letter of4 April 1974 issued on behalf of the Director-General, and had stated in a letterof 13 May 1974 that the decision was final. There was no need for the decisionin question to rule on the validity of an earlier decision; such a requirement wouldlimit the power of the appeals body to intervene to decisions alone, to the exclusionof all other acts of the administration, and that would run counter to commonly heldopinion. It was therefore immaterial whether or not the issue of an attestation wasto be regarded as a decision. What was necessary was that the complainant shouldhave an interest which was worth safeguarding if his complaint was to be received.But such an interest did exist, first, because the result of the claim for compensationsubmitted to the Tribunal was linked to the propriety of issuing the attestation and,secondly, because the complainant had an interest in securing a declaration of theunlawfulness of an act which might be repeated without his knowledge and withouthis having had the opportunity to dispute it. The Tribunal observed that although theinformation contained in the attestation could be deduced from the personal file, itcould also readily have been obtained from other sources, such as publications of theOrganisation or public records, and was therefore not confidential within the meaningof Regulation 4.12. It was therefore not a breach of that Regulation to communicatethat information to the complainant's former wife. The Tribunal nevertheless heldthat in failing to inform the complainant that an attestation concerning him had beenrequested, the Organisation had failed to perform a duty by which it was bound.In its capacity as an employer bound to safeguard the lawful interests of its staffmembers hi so far as was compatible with its own interests and those of third parties,the Organisation was, as a rule and subject to certain exceptions (emergency, protectionof overriding interests), bound to inform its staff members of requests for informationabout them before answering such requests, chiefly in order to enable them to prevent,if necessary, the injurious effects of the use of the information. Although that dutydid not derive from any express provision, it was, as it were, the counterpart of thestaff member's duty of loyalty towards the Organisation and was implicit in the StaffRegulations. In the case in question, the Organisation had all the more reason toconsult the complainant in that it did not know the intended purpose of the attestation,and it should have been all the more prudent in view of its knowledge that the com-plainant was a party to divorce proceedings.

144

The fact that the attestation contained only information which was already knownwas not decisive: that fact would, at most, have relieved the Organisation of the dutyto consult the complainant if the information sought had plainly not been of sucha nature as to cause him any injury whatever, which was net the case since it involveda staff member who was a party to divorce proceedings and since in fact the attes-tation had given rise to certain legal expenses for the complainant.

On the second claim, the Tribunal found that the purpose of establishing personalfiles was not only to keep the competent ILO bodies informed on each staff member'scareer, but also to give staff members access at any time to information on theirprofessional situation, in particular, to reports on their work performance; the pro-cedure had therefore been instituted, to a certain extent, in the interests of staffmembers, and it was open to the complainant to allege EL breach of the provisionsapplicable to the case. In that connexion, the Tribunal submitted that of the fivecategories of documents which, under Staff Regulation 4.12 should be included inthe personal file, only the last was relevant to the case, i.e. "any other documentsrelating to measures officially taken or considered in connection with the official".The text could be very broadly interpreted (measures giving rise to rights or duties)or narrowly interpreted (any measures which might, whether closely or remotely,affect a staff member). On the basis of the purpose of the personal file describedabove, the Tribunal found that "documents relating to measures officially taken orconsidered in connection with the official" should be construed to mean documentswhich affected his professional situation. Accordingly, the Organisation was not boundto include the attestation in the complainant's personal file.

The Tribunal also found the claim concerning the existence of confidential filesreceivable, since the complainant had an interest in ensuring that all documentsconcerning him should be included in his personal file, to which he had free accessunder Regulation 4.12. However, on the merits, it found that the Organisation, likeany public administration, was entitled not to put in a staff member's personal filecertain documents concerning him, since the revelation of certain information couldbe harmful not only to the interests of the Organisation or third parties but also tothose of the staff member himself. That right should, of course, be exercised only inorder to safeguard interests overriding the staff member's interest in consulting confi-dential documents. Similarly, the Organisation could not use confidential documentsas a basis for taking a decision unfavourable to its staff members, but, unless therewas a specific dispute, a staff member could not claim the right to examine documentswhich were not placed in his personal file.

Consequently, the Tribunal (1) quashed the impugned decision in so far as itfailed to acknowledge that the issue of an attestation to the complainant's formerwife without consulting him beforehand constituted a breach of duty on the partof the Organisation; (2) ordered the Organisation to pay the complainant the sumof 1,000 Swiss francs; (3) dismissed the complainant's remaining claims.

10. JUDGEMENT No. 257 (5 MAY 1975): GRAFSTRÔM v. FOOD AND AGRICULTUREORGANIZATION OF THE UNITED NATIONS

Complaint seeking an increase in a retirement pension to the level it would havereached if the recipient had not been promoted during her period of employmentfrom the General Service to the Professional category — Interpretation of staff rule302.2103 as protecting staff members from possible adverse effects on their pensionrights of a promotion

The complainant, after completing many years of service in the General Servicecategory, had been promoted to the Professional category at grade P-l. She had found

145

that the promotion had the effect of reducing her pensionable remuneration. TheAdministration had then regraded her retroactively at P-2 so that her promotionwould produce an increase in her pensionable remuneration. In the meantime, however,General Service salaries had been increased and the complainant had realized thather pension would be much smaller than that due if she had remained in her formercategory. The Tribunal, when the case came before it, noted that the two categoriesof staff members had separate salary scales and were subject to different systems ofcalculation for adjustments to meet cost-of-living increases and so forth. The problemsarose from the fact that there was no relationship between the two systems and weremade even more difficult by the fact that there were in the Staff Rules three separatespecial provisions, all of which were obviously intended to deal with the situation andwhich were not related to each other.

The first rule (Manual provision 311.231) dealt with "salary upon promotion":it provided that when a staff member was promoted to a higher grade, he was to betreated at least as well financially as if, instead of being promoted to a new grade,he had been moved up a step in his old grade.

The Staff Rules contained another set of provisions dealing with the situationin which promotion from the General Service to the Professional category resulted ina decline in pensionable remuneration. They were as follows:

"302.3102 When at the time of a staff member's promotion from the GeneralService category to the Professional category his pensionable remuneration wouldotherwise have been lower, special arrangements may be made to maintain thesaid remuneration at its previous level."

"302.442 When the pensionable remuneration of a staff member is reducedas a result of his promotion from the General Service category to the Professionalcategory, the said remuneration may, at his request, remain at its previous level(with the staff member and the Organization making their contributions accord-ingly) until such time as it is overtaken, through increments, by the level of hispensionable remuneration in the new category. At the time of promotion, thestaff member shall be informed in writing of his right to exercise this option."

The problem in the case in question was whether the rules cited above appliedonly to the present, that is, to the situation arising at the date of promotion, orwhether they were applicable to the future, that is, to a change in the situation arisingafter promotion. After the complainant's promotion the changes which occurred insalary scales and adjustments in the General Service category were more beneficialto staff than those which ocurred in the Professional category. When the complainantretired at grade P-2, step VIII, her final average pensionable remuneration was $15,157;if she had remained in her former category, the corresponding amount would havebeen $17,244, which would have entitled her to an annual pension $1,157 higher thanthat she received. If the rules were given a strict and literal interpretation, the com-plainant had to accept that consequence as an unexpected misfortune.

The Tribunal noted, however, that rule 302.3102 lent itself to being interpretedas applying to the future as well as to the present. Such a wide interpretation wasnecessary in order to give effect to what was clearly the object of such rules, namely,to ensure that a staff member did not suffer from promotion. Moreover, the com-parative increase in the salaries and related benefits in the General Service categorywas a fairly recent development. Rules of the type under consideration had beenframed to take account of that development, but it had obviously not been foreseenthat it might affect the future as well as the present. It could hardly be believed that,if the scope of the development had been foreseen, the rule would not have been

146

framed broadly enough to cover the future as well as the present. Finally, if the ruleshad to be construed literally, the result would be that they both dealt with the samesituation, i.e. the present, in different and conflicting ways. The conflict was avoidedif one, rule 302.442, which dealt with known facts, was interpreted as dealing withthe present and the other, rule 302.3103, was interpreted as dealing with the futureas well as the present. If the words "at the time of" were construed as meaning"at the time of and after" and the words "at its previous level" were construed asmeaning "at the level which it would otherwise have reached", the words "to maintain"could be given their full effect as relating to the future as well as to the present.

The Tribunal therefore remitted the case to the Director-General to enable himto make such special arrangements as might be appropiate to ensure that the com-plainant's pension was not less than it would have been if, at the time of her retirement,her pensionable remuneration had been that of her former category.

11. JUDGEMENT No. 258 (27 SEPTEMBER 1975) : CANTAL-DUPART v. UNITED NATIONSEDUCATIONAL, SCIENTIFIC AND CULTURAL ORGANIZATION

Summary dismissal of a complaint submitted after the expiry of the time-limitThe Tribunal found that the complaint impugning a decision taken on 18 June 1974

had been lodged on 21 October 1974, i.e., after the expiry of the time-limit set byarticle VII, paragraph 2, of the Statute of the Tribunal. It therefore declared thecomplaint irreceivable in accordance with article 8, paragraph 3, of its Rules of Court,which provide that a complaint which is clearly irreceivable may be summarily dis-missed without the respondent organization's being asked to reply on the merits.

12. JUDGEMENT No. 259 (27 SEPTEMBER 1975): AL JOUNDI v. INTERNATIONALTELECOMMUNICATION UNION

Irreceivability of a complaint impugning a decision which had become final becauseit had not been impugned within the prescribed period

The complainant had been informed by the Secretary-General in a letter dated26 March 1974 that his fixed-term appointment, which was due to expire on 31August 1974, would not be renewed. On 16 August 1974 he had sent a letter to theSecretary-General asking him for a final decision. The Secretary-General had con-firmed on 19 August 1974 that the complainant had been notified of the final decisionnot to renew the appointment on 26 March; to a similar request dated 22 August theSecretary-General had replied to the same effect in a letter of 23 August.

The Appeal Board had found that the appeal was time-barred and added that,even if the appeal had been receivable, it would have been unfounded. On 30 Sep-tember 1974 the Secretary-General had communicated the Board's conclusions to thecomplainant. The complainant had lodged a complaint with the Tribunal on 17 De-cember 1974 impugning the "decision" of 30 September 1974 and asking that the"decision" of 19 August 1974 should be quashed.

The Tribunal held that the letter of 26 March 1974 had constituted a decisionnot to renew the appointment and had thus determined that date as the date oftermination of the contractual relationship between the complainant and the Union.That decision had been detrimental to the complainant, who had had, under StaffRule 11.1.1, a period of six weeks in which to appeal against it.

No appeal having been lodged within that period, the decision had alreadybecome final when the complainant asked for a review of his case. The Secretary-General, and subsequently the Appeal Board, had therefore acted lawfully in dis-missing his request. The Appeal Board had also been right in taking the view thatno exceptional circumstances existed entitling it to allow a derogation from the time-limit prescribed in the above-mentioned Staff Rule.

147

13. JUDGEMENT No. 260 (27 OCTOBER 1975): MOFJELD v. FOOD AND AGRICULTUREORGANIZATION OF THE UNITED NATIONS

Complaint seeking to quash a decision terminating the employment of the holderof a fixed-term appointment for "unsuitability for a post"

The complainant, an expert holding a fixed-term appointment, had been a memberof an FAO team working on a technical assistance project in close collaboration witha government agency in the recipient country. As a result of friction, the chairmanof that agency had informed the UNDP Resident Representative in the country inquestion that it would be better for the project if the complainant were withdrawn.He had also written to the Director of the substantive division of FAO to which thecomplainant was attached asking for his early recall. In view of the circumstances,the Organization had decided that the complainant should be recalled; there being noother suitable post vacant, his services had been terminated in accordance with FAOManual provision 370.831 (v), which reads:

"Experts may be terminated:

"(v) For reasons of unsuitability for a post or assignment, no appropriate reas-signment being available in the programme (acceptability to a Governmentis a condition of suitability)."

The Appeals Committee had held that the complainant's recall and consequent termi-nation were contrary to the Manual provisions cited and had made a number ofrecommendations in favour of the complainant. The Director-General had never-theless upheld his original decision.

The Tribunal held that the complainant had been removed from his post becausehe had incurred the displeasure of the government official in charge of the project towhich he was attached. It did not appear from the file that the complainant was toblame: the Organization itself recognized that in practice instances of conflict betweenstaff members in the field and members of the counterpart staff of national authoritiesinevitably arose. The conflict might sometimes be due to circumstances beyond thecontrol of the staff member concerned.

Under the Manual provision cited above the Organization had been entitled toterminate the complainant's appointment if he was unacceptable to the Governmentof the recipient country or, in general, if he was unsuitable for his post on someother ground. The first condition would have been fulfilled by a statement from theGovernment that he was "persona non grata". In fact, there was no evidence that theofficial who had asked for the complainant's recall had been authorized to spâk forhis Government. As to the second condition, the Organization contended that thecomplainant's unacceptability to the national official in charge of the project had madehim unsuitable for his post. The Tribunal considered that that gave too broad ameaning to the word "unsuitable", so that the second condition was also not fulfilled.It concluded that there was no justification for the termination of the complainant'sappointment and quashed the impugned decision.

14. JUDGEMENT No. 261 (27 OCTOBER 1975): REMONT v. FOOD AND AGRICULTUREORGANIZATION OF THE UNITED NATIONS

Complaint seeking to attribute liability to the Organization for loss or deteriorationof personal property and to obtain compensation for delay in the payment of sumsowed by the Organization

The complainant asked the Tribunal, inter alia, to order the respondent Organ-ization to pay him (1) $1,200 as compensation for loss incurred owing to the loss or

148

deterioration of his property, for which, in his view, the Organization should be heldliable in that it had prevented him from going to the place concerned to take thenecessary measures; (2) 38,000 Belgian francs as compensation for loss owing todelay in the payment of various sums by way of salary, allowances and reimbursementof expenses incurred.

As to the first claim, the Tribunal held that it did not relate to the non-observanceby the Organization of the complainant's terms of appointment and consequently felloutside the Tribunal's jurisdiction. As to the second claim, the file did not show that,except in one case, the delay had been unreasonable. In the one case of undue delay,the Organization had paid interest at the rate of 10 per cent. The complainant's secondclaim was therefore unfounded, and the Tribunal consequently dismissed the complaint.

15. JUDGEMENT No. 262 (27 OCTOBER 1975): LABADIE v. INTERNATIONAL PATENTINSTITUTE

Complaint seeking to have a promotion granted on the basis of a specific admin-istrative rule granted on the basis of another rule more favourable to the complainant— Distinction, with respect to the Tribunal's power of review, between decisionsestablishing such rules and subsequent individual decisions to apply them — Interpre-tation of the texts in question

The complainant had joined the service of the International Patent Institute asa probationer at grade A8 on 1 September 1971; his appointment had been confirmedand he had been classified at grade A7, step 1, on 31 August 1972, with effect from1 January 1972; with effect from the same date he had been granted an additionalservice benefit of 24 months which, because of the retroactive effect of his classifi-cation at grade A7, step 1, was tantamount to additional seniority of 16 months atthat grade and step; by a decision of 11 November 1974 he had been promoted tograde A6, step 1, with effect from 1 September 1974. On 20 December 1974 he hadrequested the Director-General to review that decision with a view to having thepromotion take effect from 1 January 1974, in pursuance of section 2.1.b of thecriteria for promotion adopted by the Careers Committee., and not from 1 Septem-ber 1974, in pursuance of section 2.1.a of those criteria.44 Since he had not gainedsatisfaction, he had lodged his complaint with the Tribunal.

The Tribunal considered article 25 (1) of the Staff Regulations, which reads asfollows:

"Promotion is granted by decision of the Director-General. The staff memberwho is promoted is appointed to the next highest grade in the category to whichhe belongs. Promotion is effected solely by selection from among staff memberswho have a minimum seniority in their grade after a comparative review of themerits of those qualified for promotion and of reports on them."

44 Section 2.La of the criteria reads:"Staff members who have not later than 1974 reached grade A7, step 3, and are

deemed to have shown sufficient merit, i.e., to have obtained performance marks of atleast 15 for each of the years 1971, 1972 and 1973 or a performance mark of at least16 for 1973, as confirmed by their performance reports, shall be promoted to grade A6on the date proposed by the competent committee."According to section 2.1.b of the criteria:

"Staff members who in 1974 have 12 months' seniority at grade A7, step 2, andhave obtained a performance mark of at least 15.5 in 1972 and 16.5 in 1973, as con-firmed by their performance reports, shall be promoted to grade A6 on the date pro-posed by the competent committee."

149

The effect of that provision, particularly the word "selection", was that as a rulethe decision whether or not to promote a staff member fell within the discretionaryauthority of the Director-General and was therefore subject to only limited reviewby the Tribunal. It had to be borne in mind, however, that, instead of grantingpromotion on the merits of each case, the Director-General might lay down before-hand criteria for promotion and communicate them to the staff. The formulation ofsuch criteria was within the discretionary authority of the Director-General, and theTribunal, if it had to determine their validity, would have only a limited power ofreview. Nevertheless, in applying the rules, the Director-General was bound to observethe criteria which he had established; to infringe them would accordingly be regardedby the Tribunal as a defect which warranted quashing the impugned decision. Thequestion was, therefore, whether the impugned decision was in conformity with thecriteria adopted by the Director-General.

While admitting the applicability of section Z.I.a of the criteria, the complainantclaimed that he was covered also by section 2.1.b, which was more favourable to himin that it would cause his promotion to take effect from 1 January 1974. The Tribunalheld that if staff members with 12 months' seniority in 1974 at grade A7, step 2,met the condition relating to seniority, so a fortiori did the complainant, who by 1973had already been at that step for 12 months. Moreover, since the complainant hadobtained performance marks of 16 in 1972 and 16.5 in 1973, he met the conditionrelating to performance. He was therefore entitled to claim the application of section2.1.b in his favour.

The Tribunal held that, contrary to the Institute's contention, the absence of thewords "not later than" in section 2.1,b did not mean that the provision applied onlyto staff members who had the required seniority in 1974, to the exclusion of thosewho had had it earlier. Whether intentional or not, the difference between the twotexts did not necessarily mean that the solutions should also be different, unless thatdifference was based on objective reasons. The Institute contended that since section2.1.b took account of performance as well as of seniority, to grant the complainantthe benefit of that section would be to overlook the importance of performance. Butthe complainant had met the performance requirements of section 2.1.b in 1972and 1973, so that there was no need to consider whether, had that section beenapplicable in 1973, he would have met the performance requirements during theprevious two years. It was his position in 1974 which had to be determined and notthe position he would have been in earlier. Furthermore, the Institute's interpretationproduced the unwarranted result that the complainant would be deprived of thebenefit of section 2.1.b on the grounds that on confirmation of his appointment hehad received some months' service benefit too many. Clearly the appraisal of hisperformance which had secured the complainant such a benefit on the terminationof his probation could not stand in the way of his subsequent promotion.

The Tribunal held that the complainant was justified in contending that bothsections 2.1.a and 2.1.b were applicable in his case and, considering that he wasentitled to rely on the provision more favourable to him, decided that he was promotedfrom grade A7 to grade A6 with effect from 1 January 1974 and ordered the Instituteto pay him interest at the rate of 6 per cent per year on the overdue sums with effectfrom the dates on which they ought to have been paid.

16. JUDGEMENT No. 263 (27 OCTOBER 1975): ANDARY v. INTERNATIONAL PATENTINSTITUTE

Complaint against a decision depriving staff members who have resigned of theright to promotion — Limits of the Tribunal's power of review with respect to suchdecisions

150

The complainant, whom the Careers Committee had on 20 September 1974 rec-ommended for promotion with effect from 1 January 1974, had by letter of 30 Sep-tember 1974 submitted his resignation, which had been accepted with effect from31 December 1974. On 14 November 1974 the Director-General had distributed toall staff members of the Institute a "staff circular" giving the list of promoted staffmembers and stating the criteria on which promotions had been based. It was statedin the circular that the Director-General had adopted the criteria on which the Com-mittee had based a recommendation for promoting the complainant, but the following"remark", which applied to him, had been added: "Staff members who have resignedor have been granted leave for reasons of personal convenience are not consideredfor promotion." For that reason the complainant had not been included in the list ofstaff promoted. In a letter of 26 November 1974 the complainant had asked theDirector-General to promote him but that request had been refused on 4 February 1975.On 31 January 1975 he had lodged a complaint with the Tribunal.

The Tribunal found the complaint receivable in accordance with article VII,paragraph 3, of its Statute, inasmuch as the complainant had not received a replyto his letter of 26 November 1974 within the prescribed time-limit of 60 days.

As to its power of review, the Tribunal reiterated the argumentation summarizedin the second paragraph of subsection 15 above. In the case before it, the laying downby the Director-General of the rule in the "remark" cited above was within hisdiscretionary authority. The Tribunal was required to determine the validity ofthe rule, in other words, to decide a matter within the scope of its limited powerto review. Contrary to the complainant's contention, a decision not to promote staffmembers who have resigned was not tainted with any defect which entitled theTribunal to interfere. First, the recommendations of the Careers Committee were notbinding on the Director-General, who could modify the criteria submitted to him bythe Committee or limit their application ratione personae. To claim that the Director-General was bound by some sort of quasi-contractual agreement to accept the CareersCommittee's recommendations was to misunderstand the nature of the relationshipbetween the Institute's supreme executive body and a purely advisory body. Lastly,in refusing to promote staff members who had resigned, the Director-General hadnot drawn any clearly mistaken conclusion from the position of such officials: eitherthe promoted staff member was given in addition to a salary increase, new duties orgreater responsibilities, which in the case in question could not happen, as the estaffmember who had resigned would have remained for too short a time in his newpost to perform the duties expected of him, or the promoted staff member simplyobtained an increase in salary, in which case the purpose of the promotion was notmerely to reward the official for past and present performance but also generally toencourage him to remain in the service of his employer, so that in the latter case therefusal to promote was again justified.

17. JUDGEMENT No. 264 (27 OCTOBER 1975): RABOZÉE v. EUROPEAN ORGANIZATIONFOR THE SAFETY OF AIR NAVIGATION

Complaint seeking reimbursement of medical expenses incurred in respect of thecomplainant's spouse and a dependant — Case of a household in which one spousebenefits as a staff member of the Organization from a sickness insurance scheme whichis more favourable than that covering the other spouse — Identical rights of maleand female staff members with respect to such benefits

The complainant, whose husband was an employee of Belgian National Railways(SNCB), had unsuccessfully sought, on the basis of article 72 of the Service Regula-tions, to have medical expenses incurred by her in respect of her husband and son

151

reimbursed, subject to the deduction of amounts already recovered from the sicknessinsurance scheme of SNCB staff.

The Tribunal considered article 72, paragraph 1, of the Service Regulations whichreads as follows:

"Subject to a maximum of 80 per cent of the expenses incurred and tothe rules laid down by the Director-General, the staff member and his spouse,children and other dependants are covered by sickness insurance. The maximumis, however, increased from 80 to 100 per cent in the case of tuberculosis,poliomyelitis, cancer, mental illness and other illnesses recognized by the author-ities competent to make such declaration as being of similar gravity. A third ofthe contribution towards the cost of such insurance is borne by the insured person,provided that it shall not exceed 2 per cent of his basic salary."

The Tribunal noted that under that provision a staff member's spouse was oneof the persons who might be regarded as a staff member's dependant and as suchwas covered by sickness insurance. In its view, such an interpretation of article 72,paragraph 1, reflected the real position of spouses, who owed each other mutualassistance and who, when both were gainfully employed, might be regarded as mutuallydependent. Moreover, the provision was expressed in general terms and, according tothe general principles of existing law, was applicable even in the absence of expressprovision, irrespective of the sex of the staff member. Accordingly, if the staff memberwas a woman, her husband should benefit in his wife's right from sickness insuranceas prescribed in article 72 cited above if he did not himself benefit in his own rightfrom a more favourable or at least equally favourable insurance scheme.

The Tribunal consequently ordered reimbursement by the Organization to thecomplainant of the difference between the amount to which she was entitled inrespect of her husband and the amount to which her husband was entitled as anemployee of SNCB.

152

Chapter VI

SELECTED LEGAL OPINIONS OF THE SECRETARIATS OF THE UNITEDNATIONS AND RELATED INTERGOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS

A. Legal opinions of the Secretariat of the United Nations(Issued or prepared by the Office of Legal Affairs)

1. FORMS OF ASSOCIATION OF STATES WITH THE UNITED NATIONS APART FROM FULLMEMBERSHIP QUESTION WHETHER STATES NOT MEMBERS OF THE UNITED NATIONSMAY BENEFIT UNDER THE TECHNICAL CO-OPERATION PROGRAMMES OF THE UNITEDNATIONS FAMILY ON THE SAME BASIS AS MEMBER STATES

Extracts from a letter to the Prime Minister of a Transitional Government

As to forms of association with the United Nations, the Charter makes no provisionexcept for full membership. Nevertheless, non-member States do participate in thework of certain United Nations bodies, which include inter alia the United NationsConference on Trade and Development, the United Nations Industrial DevelopmentOrganization, the United Nations Environment Programme and the United NationsDevelopment Programme. Such participation is contingent upon membership in oneof the specialized agencies or the International Atomic Energy Agency. The termsof reference of the Economic Commission for Africa do not presently provide formembership of independent States that are not members of the United Nations . . . .

With regard to the question whether a State that is not a member of the UnitedNations may benefit under the social and economic programmes of the United Nations

specialized agencies on the same footing as Member States, the answer is generallyspeaking in the affirmative provided that the State concerned is a member of one ofthe specialized agencies or of the International Atomic Energy Agency. This, however,does not hold true in the case of the International Bank for Reconstruction and Devel-opment and the International Monetary Fund since the resources and facilities ofthese institutions are, under their respective Articles of Agreement,1 available only tomember Governments. It should be mentioned that the International Bank for Re-construction and Development on occasion acts as an executing agency for UnitedNations Development Programme projects and that in thai: capacity it does provideassistance to the Government or Governments concerned.

12 June 1975

2. QUESTION OF THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE UNITED NATIONS FOR ACTIVITIES CON-DUCTED BY ONE OF ITS ORGANS IN THE TERRITORY OF A STATE

Internal memorandum

You have asked for information in relation to a provision of the draft articles


153

being prepared by the International Law Commission on State responsibility. Thisprovision2 reads as follows:

"The conduct of an organ of an international organization shall not beconsidered as an act of a State under international law by the mere fact thatsuch a conduct has taken place in the territory of that State or in any territoryunder its jurisdiction."

The carrying-out of activities by an organ or body of the United Nations in theterritory of a State is normally subject to an agreement concluded between the Statein question and the international organization concerned. The agreements relating totechnical assistance programmes concluded between the United Nations or the special-ized agencies and beneficiary Governments usually provide that the host country willhold harmless the international organization, its employees and agents.3

Agreements concluded for the conduct of peace-keeping operations containprovisions for the settlement of damages resulting from acts causing injury to thirdparties. Thus, the agreement of 27 November 1961 relating to the legal status, facilities,privileges and immunities of the United Nations Operation in the Congo (ONUC)4

stipulates in its paragraph 10(Z>) that "if as a result of any act performed by a memberof the Force or an official in the course of his official duties, it is alleged that lossor damage that may give rise to civil proceedings has been caused to a citizen orresident of the Congo, the United Nations shall settle the dispute by negotiation orany other method agreed between the Parties and that if it is not found possible toarrive at an agreement in this manner, the matter shall be submitted to arbitration atthe request of either Party." Under paragraph 10(c) the same procedure would applyto the settlement of civil disputes not related to official duties. The agreement con-cerning the status of the United Nations Peace-Keeping Force in Cyprus of 31 March19645 provides in its paragraph 38(6) that:

"(b) Any claim made by

"(i) a Cypriot citizen in respect of any damages alleged to result froman act or omission of a member of the Force relating to his official duties;

"(ii) the Government against a member of the Force; or

"(Hi) the Force or the Government against one another, that is not coveredby paragraphs 39 or 40 of these arrangements,

"shall be settled by a Claims Commission established for that purpose."

An identical provision is to be found in the agreement of 8 February 1957 concerningthe status of the United Nations Emergency Force in Egypt.6 Pursuant to a provisionalarrangement concerning the United Nations Emergency Force in Lebanon,7 "civilclaims or disputes involving a member of the Force acting in the course of his officialduty shall be settled in accordance with the provision of Article VIII of the Conventionon the Privileges and Immunities of the United Nations." The above provisions regardingpeace-keeping operations provide for submission of claims directly to the internationalorganization for acts or omissions of members of the Forces.

2 Adopted provisionally by the International Law Commission at its twenty-seventhsession as article 13 of the draft articles (see Official Records of the General Assembly,Thirtieth Session, Supplement No. 10 (A/10010/Rev.l), p. 39).

3 For examples, see Chapter II of this and previous editions of the Juridical Yearbook.* United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 414, p. 229.5 Ibid., vol. 492, p. 57; also reproduced in the Juridical Yearbook, 1964, p. 40.«United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 268, p. 61.

vol. 266, p. 125.

154

It should also be noted that claims against ONUC lodged with the United Nationsby nationals of various countries were the subject of global settlements between theUnited Nations and the countries concerned. Agreements in the form of exchangesof letters were thus concluded with Belgium,8 Greece,9 Luxembourg,10 Italy,11 Swit-zerland12 and Zambia.

In the exchange of letters with Belgium, on which subsequent agreements withother countries were patterned, the Secretary-General of the United Nations wroteas follows:

"The United Nations has agreed that the claims of Belgian nationals whomay have suffered damage as a result of harmful acts committed by ONUCpersonnel, not arising from military necessity, should be dealt with in an equitablemanner.

"It has stated it would not evade responsibility where it was established thatUnited Nations agents had in fact caused unjustifiable damage to innocent parties."

10 June 1975

3. PROVISIONS OF THE HEADQUARTERS AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE UNITED NATIONSAND THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA CONCERNING ACTION BY THE HOST STATEIN CASE OF ABUSE OF THE PRIVILEGES OF RESIDENCE GRANTED BY THE AGREEMENT—QUESTION WHETHER THE HOST STATE is REQUIRED IN SUCH A CASE TO CONSULTTHE ORGANIZATION BEFORE TAKING ACTION

Telegram to the Secretariat of the United Nations Conference on the Representationof States in their Relations with International Organizations13

Section 13 of the Headquarters Agreement14 concluded between the UnitedNations and the United States does not require the host Sta.te to consult the Organ-ization [before taking action in case of abuse of privileges of residence]. In practice,the Organization is always informed by the host State of its action and of the groundstherefore since otherwise the Organization cannot render the kind of assistancereferred to in articles 22 and 53 [Assistance by the Organization in respect ofprivileges and immunities] of the International Law Commission's draft and cannotverify that the action of the host State is in conformity with the Headquarters Agree-

8 Ibid., vol. 535, p. 191; also reproduced in the Juridical Yearbook, 1965, pp. 39-40.9 United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 565, p. 3.i° Ibid., vol. 585, p. 147.11 Ibid., vol. 588, p. 197.vibid., vol. 564, p. 193.13 This telegram was sent in reply to a request for information in connexion with

article 9 of the ILC's draft on the representation of States in their relations with internationalorganizations (see Official Records of the General Assembly, Twenty-seventh Session, Supple-ment No. 10 (A/8410/Rev.l), Chapter II) which was the basic proposal before the Confer-ence and became in an amended form the Convention on the Representation of States in theirRelations with International Organizations of a Universal Character. Draft article 9 read:

"Subject to the provisions of articles 14 [on the size of the mission] and 72 [onnationality], the sending State may freely appoint the members of the mission."

In the course of the Conference, amendments to this draft article were submitted (A/CONF.67/L.1, L.18 and L.28 (see Official Records of the United Nations Conference onthe Representation of States in their Relations with International Organizations, OfficialDocuments (A/CONF.67/18/Add. 1—United Nations publications, Sales No. E.75.V.12)),the object of which was to allow the host State, after consultation with the sending Stateand the Organization, to notify the sending State and the Organization that the head or amember of the staff of the mission was no longer acceptable to the host State.


155

ment, i.e. not based on activities performed by the person concerned in his officialcapacity. Article 75 of the Commission's draft is worded only in terms of the dutyof recall by the sending State and if article 9 is to provide for the right of the hostState to expel—which is a different matter—it should in our view be limited to casesof abuse of privileges of residence in activities outside official capacity. In this con-nexion, we refer you to the observations of the Secretariat of the United Nations onthe provisional draft articles adopted by the Commission in 1968, 1969 and 197015

as well as to the Secretariat study entitled "The practice of the United Nations, thespecialized agencies and the International Atomic Energy Agency concerning theirstatus, privileges and immunities".16 The Secretary-General's report to the GeneralAssembly at its second session on the Headquarters Agreement states, with referenceto Section 13(Z>):

"This procedure is in line with that followed in diplomatic relations in thecase of a serious offence committed by a diplomatic representative in the countryto which he is accredited but can only apply within very narrow limits sincethe United States is the host country and not the country to which beneficiariesof article IV are accredited.

"The procedure laid down in section 13 cannot, for example, be appliedin the case of a persona non grata: there must have been some activity outsidehis official capacity coming within the scope of specific laws or regulations."17

In addition, the report of the Sub-Committee on Privileges and Immunities18

approved by the Sixth Committee and incorporated in its report to the General Assemblystates:

"The Sub-Committee considers that section 13(6) of the Agreement,providing for the application by the United States of America of the laws andregulations in force in its territory regarding the residence of aliens in the UnitedStates of America, should be construed to mean that before any person can berequired to leave the country on charges of having abused his privileges, theremust be really serious grounds which would preclude the possibility of unwar-ranted accusations against such a person.

"The Sub-Committee also emphasized the importance of section 13(Z>)(i),which provides that before any demand is made for the departure of a particularperson on the grounds stated in section 13(6), there shall be consultations be-tween the United States authorities and the appropriate Government, in the caseof a representative of such a Government, or between the United States author-ities and the Secretary-General of the United Nations or the principle executiveofficer of the appropriate specialized agency in the case of any other personreferred to in section II."19- 20

13 February 1975

15 Official Records of the General Assembly, Twenty-third Session, Supplement No. 10(A/8410/Rev.l), pp. 143-145.

16 Reproduced in the Yearbook of the International Law Commission, 1967, vol. II,document A/CN.4/L.118 and Add.l and 2, pp. 181-182 and 199-200.

17 Official Records of the Second Session of the General Assembly, Sixth Committee,Annex 11, p. 331.

18 Established by the Sixth Committee at its 36th meeting in 1947 (ibid., p. 3).19 Official Records of the Second Session of the General Assembly, Plenary Meetings,

vol. II, p. 1521.20 Article 9 of the ILC's draft articles was maintained without change by the Con-

ference and became article 9 of the Convention on the Representation of States in theirRelations with International Organizations of a Universal Character, reproduced on p. 92of this Yearbook.

156

4. PRIVILEGES AND IMMUNITIES TO WHICH REPRESENTATIVES OF THE COUNCIL FORMUTUAL ECONOMIC ASSISTANCE WOULD BE ENTITLED iisr THE UNITED STATES ASHOST STATE TO THE HEADQUARTERS OF THE UNITED NATIONS IN THE LIGHT OFGENERAL ASSEMBLY RESOLUTION 3209 (XXIX)

Letter to the Permanent Representative of a Member State

You have requested me to set out my views concerning the privileges and immu-nities to which representatives of the Council for Mutual Economic Assistance(CMEA) would be entitled in the United States, as host State to the Headquartersof the United Nations, in the light of General Assembly resolution 3209 (XXIX)of 11 October 1974 [entitled "Status of the Council for Mutual Economic Assistancein the General Assembly"].

I am happy to confirm what I have already mentioned to you orally. By itsresolution 3209 (XXIX), the Assembly has requested the Secretary-General "to invitethe Council for Mutual Economic Assistance to participate in the sessions and workof the General Assembly in the capacity of observer." The representatives of theCMEA, appointed pursuant to the invitation just mentioned, would benefit from thefollowing provisions of the Headquarters Agreement between the United Nationsand the host State:

(i) section 11, which provides that the federal, state or local authoritiesof the United States "shall not impose any impediments to transit to or fromthe headquarters district o f . . . persons invited to the headquarters district bythe United Nations" and that "the appropriate American authorities shall affordany necessary protection to such persons while in transit to or from the head-quarters district";

(ii) section 12, which provides that section 11 is applicable irrespectiveof relations between the Governments of the persons referred to in the lattersection and the host State, and

(iii) section 13, which provides that the host State shall grant visas "withoutcharge and as promptly as possible" to persons referred to in section 11 andalso exempts such persons from being required to leave the United States onaccount of any activities performed by them in their official capacity.

In addition to the foregoing privileges and immunities, it is my belief that itnecessarily follows from the obligations imposed by Article 105 of the Charter ofthe United Nations that a CMEA delegation would enjoy immunity from legal processin respect of words spoken or written and all acts performed by members of thedelegation in their official capacity before relevant United Nations organs.

The above privileges and immunities represent in my view the scope of suchprivileges and immunities which the host State is obliged under existing internationalinstruments to accord to a CMEA delegation. The host State may, of course, as amatter of courtesy, extend a wider variety of privileges and immunities to the delega-tion. However, this is for the CMEA, or its members, to negotiate with the hostState.

7 January 1975

5. JUDICIAL JURISDICTION AND LAW APPLICABLE IN THE HEADQUARTERS DISTRICTUNDER THE HEADQUARTERS AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE UNITED NATIONS AND THEUNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Letter to a judge of the Criminal Court of the City of New York

I am directed by the Secretary-General of the United Nations to refer to the

157

case against... in which a Security Officer of the United Nations Secretariat is thecomplainant.

. . . the Court has requested legal memoranda from the United Nations Secretariat,as well as from the defendant, on the question of the Court's jurisdiction in the case.

In compliance with the Court's request, I am directed to state the following. Itis understood that the defendant's objection to the Court's jurisdiction relies on thefact that the alleged act was directed against United Nations property situated withinthe Headquarters District of the United Nations.

The question of jurisdiction is governed by Article III, entitled "Law andAuthority in the Headquarters District" of the Agreement between the United Nationsand the United States of America regarding the Headquarters of the United Nations.This Agreement is part of the law of the land, having been adopted as Public Law 357by the Eightieth Congress, First Session;21 it appears at 22 U.S.C. 287.

Article III, Section 7 (b) and (c) of the Headquarters Agreement provide:"(&) Except as otherwise provided in this agreement or in the General

Convention, the federal, state and local law of the United States shall applywithin the headquarters district.

"(c) Except as otherwise provided in this agreement or in the GeneralConvention, the federal, state and local courts of the United States shall havejurisdiction over acts done and transactions taking place in the headquartersdistrict as provided in applicable federal, state and local laws."

The proviso hi the two paragraphs quoted above regarding the agreement refersto Section 8 of the Headquarters Agreement, which empowers the United Nations tomake regulations operative within the headquarters district. I am authorized to statethat no regulation in the field of, or affecting the application of, criminal law hasbeen adopted by the United Nations. Only three regulations have been adopted,relating to entirely different matters.22

The other proviso regarding the General Convention refers to the Convention onthe Privileges and Immunities of the United Nations, approved by the GeneralAssembly of the United Nations on 13 February 1946, and acceded to by the UnitedStates of America on 29 April 1970. This Convention, however, contains no provisionwhich would afford immunity from legal process to the defendant nor does any ofthe provisions of the Convention limit the general principle of Sections 7(6) and (c)of the Headquarters Agreement, quoted above.

In this connexion it is important to observe that the United Nations has nocriminal jurisdiction or tribunals under any law or treaty. Therefore, if the Courtwere to treat acts of a criminal nature committed within the headquarters district asexcluded from the jurisdiction of the federal, state or local courts of the UnitedStates, the consequence would be to create a jurisdictional vacuum in the sense thatthere would be no courts before which crimes could be tried. Such a situation wouldbe to the advantage neither of the United Nations nor of the people of the State ofNew York.

21 See United Nations Legislative Series, Legislative Texts and Treaty Provisionsconcerning the Legal Status, Privileges and Immunities of International Organizations (ST/LEG/SER.B/10—United Nations publication, Sales No.: 60.V.2), p. 134.

22 For the text of these three Regulations, entitled, respectively, "United Nations SocialSecurity System", "Qualifications for professional or other occupational services with theUnited Nations" and "Operation of services within the Headquarters District", see GeneralAssembly resolution 604 (VI) of 1 February 1952.

158

A precedent supporting the above reasoning is found in the case of People v.Nicholas Coumatos 224 NYS 2d 504. The Court in this case quoted in its entiretya letter from the United Nations Office of Legal Affairs relating to defendant's motionto dismiss on the ground that the court lacked jurisdiction over allegedly fraudulenttransactions because such transactions had taken place within the headquarters districtof the United Nations.23

For all the above reasons of law, it is our view that the jurisdiction of the courtsof New York State is not affected by the question whether or not the alleged act tookplace inside or outside the headquarters district of the United Nations.

The question of judicial jurisdiction within the headquarters district has beendiscussed in legal literature, inter alia in an article by Mr. Yuen-li Liang, entitled"Legal Status of the United Nations in the United States," International Law Quarterly,1948-49, pp. 577-602, especially p. 596, and in a note entitled "Status of InternationalOrganizations under the Law of the United States," Harvard Law Review, 1957-58,p. 1300. Of particular interest is the information contained in the last mentioned noteon page 1313, footnote 99, to the effect that "although the New York legislatureauthorized cession of jurisdiction over the land to be occupied by the United Nations,there was no cession. See New York Attorney General's Report 97 (1951)."

9 December 1975

6. COMMENTS ON THE JURIDICAL STATUS OF THE UNITED NATIONS DEMOGRAPHICCENTRE IN BUCHAREST, IN THE LIGHT OF THE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE UNITEDNATIONS AND ROMANIA REGARDING THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE CENTRE

Memorandum to the Chief of the Operations Section, Population Programmes andProjects Office, Population Division, Department of Economic and Social Affairs

1. I wish to refer to your memorandum dated 11 March 1975 in which yourelayed to me the request of the Director of the Demographic Centre in Bucharest,for the views of the Office of Legal Affairs "on the exact meaning of the Centre's hav-ing a juridical personality".

2. The Agreement between the United Nations and the Government of the So-cialist Republic of Romania regarding the Establishment of a Demographic Centre atBucharest, signed 28 August 1974, entered into force upon ratification by Romaniaon 28 October 1974.24 As stated in your memorandum, the question of the Centre'sjuridical personality is the subject of Article I, section 5, of the Agreement reading:

"The Centre shall have a legal personality distinct from that of the Parties,and shall not be considered as a body of the United Nations or of the Govern-ment. The Government shall publish statutory orders concerning the legal statusof the Centre."

3. Considering that both Parties to the Agreement are themselves internationalentities, and since there is no indication to the contrary, the normal interpretation ofsection 5 is that the Parties intended to confer international legal personality on theCentre, on the understanding that the Centre should not be a subsidiary organ of anyof the Parties.

4. Your memorandum and the request of the Director of the Centre, however,indicate that your query also concerns whether the Centre bas a juridical (or legal)

23 For a summary of the case, see Yearbook of the International Law Commission,1967, vol. II, p. 233.


159

personality under Romanian internal law in addition to the Centre's standing in inter-national law. In this connexion, it is arguable that the Parties intended section 5 toconfer legal personality only under international and not necessarily under Romanianlaw. But if so, the last sentence of section 5 according to which the Romanian Gov-ernment will publish the regulations determining the legal status of the Centre, wouldnot have been required. Regulations issued by a Government could not authoritativelyregulate an entity's legal status under international law in most respects, but if issuedpursuant to and under the authority of the Agreement between the Parties (section 5,last sentence), such regulations would be a normal mode for determining the Centre'sstatus in domestic law.

5. It appears therefore that the Centre was intended by the Parties as an inter-national entity distinct from the Parties themselves. Moreover, the attributes of theCentre's international legal personality would be defined by, or derive from, the termsand purposes of the Agreement, and it is this personality which, in turn, the RomanianGovernment would recognize and the acts of which it would regulate for the purposesof Romanian internal law in the regulations referred to in the last sentence of section 5.Thus, the formal and substantive requirements applicable to the Centre's capacityto enter into contracts, to sue or be sued, etc. would be stated in the regulations to theextent required by Romanian internal law.

6. In view of the foregoing, the exact attributes of the Centre's legal personalitycould not be effectively described without detailed reference to Romanian law. Whilethe Office of Legal Affairs will be prepared to render advice and counsel on suchconcrete questions as may arise, it is suggested that, whenever appropriate, such ques-tions could with advantage be addressed in the first instance to the competent Romanianauthorities.

24 March 1975

7. INSURANCE OF UNEF/UNDOF VEHICLES AGAINST THIRD PARTY LIABILITY—QUES-TION WHETHER UNITED NATIONS IMMUNITY FROM LEGAL PROCESS SHOULD BEINVOKED OR WAIVED, WHERE JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS ARE INSTITUTED AGAINST THEUNITED NATIONS IN CONNEXION WITH MOTOR VEHICLE ACCIDENTS

Memorandum, to the Chief, Salary and Allowances, Office of Financial Services

1. I refer to your memorandum of 10 March 1975.2. There is a resolution of the General Assembly on the subject of third party

liability insurance of United Nations motor-vehicles, namely resolution XIII.6(E) of13 February 1946. As long as the resolution continues to apply, insurance of UnitedNations motor-vehicles against third party liability would be necessary.

3. The question whether United Nations immunity from legal process shouldbe invoked or waived, where judicial proceedings are instituted against the Organ-ization, is, in our opinion, a matter that ought to be examined in the light of the factsof each case. A general position to the effect that United Nations immunity shall notbe waived with respect to a certain category of third party liabilities, because theOrganization does not carry insurance against such liabilities, may not be eitherreasonable or appropriate. Moreover, as arbitration of a claim may be necessary whereUnited Nations immunity from suit is invoked, we should not assume that the invokingof immunity would be a non-expensive course or in every case the less expensivecourse.

4. Aside from the requirements of General Assembly resolution XHI.6(E), it isour view that third party liability insurance of UNEF/UNDOF vehicles should con-

160

tinue to be purchased. In this connexion, it should be kept in mind that the costs ofdefending third party claims whether in judicial or arbitration proceedings could besubstantial: retention of a local counsel would in all probability be necessary in themore difficult cases; and, where personal injury is involved, costs of expert medicaltestimony would need to be considered as well. It should also be noted that to place aceiling on the compensation that may be awarded in death or personal injury casesis difficult, and the compensation could be considerable. Moreover, we should not losesight of the possibility, however remote that possibility may now appear to be, thata claimant in a death or personal injury case may be a national or a resident of acountry outside the region where the compensation awarded in death or personal injurycases may be astronomical. A third element is, as you have noted, the additional burdenwhich a system of non-insurance would place on already heavily worked UnitedNations offices, including the relevant field offices. Finally, we should keep in mind thatthe United Nations should be as free from unnecessary controversy as possible andthat non-submission to the jurisdiction of a local court in a personal injury case mayprove a controversial matter in the area concerned.

5. You are right in assuming that certain countries make purchase of third partyliability insurance for a motor vehicle compulsory. We are not aware of what therequirements are under the law of the countries of the region. Should you wish tohave the question clarified, the relevant United Nations field offices should be ableto be of assistance. The Organization has not as yet concluded status of forces agree-ments with Egypt, Israel or Syria. Such agreements in the past have exempted UnitedNations vehicles from local vehicle registration requirements.

18 March 1975

8. ADVICE ON THE PROCEDURE TO BE FOLLOWED TO COLLECT COMPENSATION FORDAMAGE CAUSED TO UNEF PROPERTY BY MEMBERS OF MILITARY CONTINGENTS

Memorandum to the Chief, Field Operations Service,Office of General Services

1. I refer to your memorandum of 8 August 1975 requesting our comments asto whether UNEF may apply the policy of collecting moneys from military personnelthrough their Contingent Commanders with respect to damage caused by them toUNEF property.

2. While in general, Contingent Commanders have broad disciplinary authority,they have little or no authority to impose financial assessments upon members of theContingents. The Financial element which may attach to the disciplinary powers ofmilitary commanders is limited and is more in the nature of a fine than of a compen-sation for damage.

3. Normally, a determination as to the financial assessment of military personnellies with national jurisdictional organs and involves a judicial or quasi-judicial admin-istrative process under domestic law. We believe that because of constitutional andstructural requirements, it is unlikely that the exercise of such judicial or jurisdictionalpower would be or may be extended to Contingent Commanders.

4. Even if some Contingent Commanders were empowered to collect moneysfor damage caused by members of the contingent to United Nations property andturn those moneys over to UNEF, the financial circumstances; of enlisted men wouldmake it difficult or impossible in practice that assessments of a certain importance besatisfied.

161

5. Consequently, we consider that in the light of legal and practical considera-tions, it is advisable that damage to United Nations property resulting from actsor omissions of military members of Contingents should be settled internationally,namely through a direct relationship between the United Nations and the Govern-ment concerned. This conclusion is supported by the practice followed hi previousand existing peace-keeping forces; the situation is different in the case of UnitedNations military observers who are seconded to the United Nations in their in-dividual capacity and can be assessed on emoluments paid to them by the UnitedNations.

6. A possible procedure to collect compensation for damage caused to UnitedNations property by members of Contingents may be that the assessments of theProperty Survey Board, together with the proceedings of the Board and the opinionof the Contingent Commander, should be transmitted to the competent service atHeadquarters, which in turn would either set up a debit against the Governmentconcerned (applied to offset United Nations obligations to the said Government)or would submit a claim to the Government for reimbursement of the amount ofdamage involved. The refund to the Government by the military member concernedof the compensation would thus fall within the exclusive competence of such Gov-ernment, in accordance with its own legislation.

7. However, we see no objection to UNEF accepting compensation moneyscollected by a Contingent Commander from military members of its Contingentand voluntarily paid to the Organization.

20 August 1975

9. "TRADE NAMES", "TRADE MARKS" AND "FRANCHISES"

Note prepared at the request of the Under-Secretary-General forPolitical and Security Council Affairs

1. Trade name and trade mark

Section 1(1 )(d) of the Model Law for Developing Countries on Marks, TradeNames, and Acts of Unfair Competition25 defines the term "trade name" as "thename or designation identifying the enterprise of a natural or legal person." Thetrade name of an enterprise may consist of the name of the owner, or it may be apseudonym, an invented name, an abbreviation, a description of the enterprise, orsome other designation.26

Whereas a trade name refers to an enterprise, the term "trademark" refers togoods.27 Section l(l)(a) of the Model Law defines "trademark" as "any visiblesign serving to distinguish the goods of one enterprise from those of other enterprises".The goods may be manufactured products or natural products; they may be pro-duced or merely sold by the owner of the mark, or may be distributed by him with-out charge, as in the case of wrappings or advertising materials.28

Many firms use their trade name as a trade mark on the products they produceor distribute. Nevertheless, the two concepts are legally distinct.

The owner of a trade name or trade mark can license another party to useit in his own business. Such licensing is usually accompanied by further arrange-

25 Model Law drafted and recommended by the United International Bureaux for theProtection of Intellectual Property, BIRPI, Geneva, 1967.

20 Commentary to Section 1 of the Model Law by BIRPI, p. 16.27 The Model Law also gives definition of the associated terms "service mark", "collective

mark", "indication of source" and appellation of origin".2S Commentary to Section 1 of the Model Law by BIRPI, p. 15.

162

ments and is frequently part of a "franchise contract" under which the franchiseepays for the benefit of sharing the franchisor's goodwill and the reputation of hisproducts or services. Thus, agreements to operate service stations or retail outletsin accordance with the franchisor's detailed instructions have been called "rent-a-name" business.29

2. Economic and legal aspects of "franchising"

The basis of the franchise system has been described as "a trademark com-bined with know-how and often coupled with special designs and special décor ofthe premises, both inside and out."30

The franchisee is often required to buy the supplies and materials he needsonly from the franchisor or from sources specified by the franchisor. From thesesales of supplies and materials the franchisor receives a profit which is in additionto the license fees which are usually charged for the use of the trade name or trademark. The requirement that the franchisee purchase from designated sources alsohelps the franchisor maintain quality control and a consistent image among all hisfranchisees.

The main reason for the rapidly growing popularity of "franchising" as a toolof uniform marketing strategy can be seen in the mutual benefits: the franchisor isable to maintain a large network of standardized production and distribution with-out investing capital in the outlets, and the franchisee is provided with a pre-established market based on the reputation of the trade name or trade mark aswell as with technical assistance in conducting his business. Franchising agreementsare to be found in many areas of economic activity, but they are particularly usedin the distribution of consumer goods (e.g. cars, petroleum products, furniture, elec-trical appliances, food) and services (e.g. hotels, restaurants, car-rentals).

The most common types of agreement are:(a) The manufacturing franchise in which the franchisor exploits some

manufacturing process, secret formula, or other know-how by licensing othersto manufacture and distribute the end product under his trade mark or tradename;

(b) The distributing franchise in which the i'ranchisor produces thegoods to be sold and the franchise system provides a means of marketing hiswares, either at the wholesale or retail level;

(c) The chainstyle (service) franchise in which the franchisor does notproduce the goods to be sold but is interested in exploiting a valuable servicemark, the trade mark, design, etc. which he owns by licensing its use to fran-chisees who agree to operate service facilities or retail outlets in accordancewith the franchisor's instructions.81

Since the franchise agreement is fundamentally a commercial concept ratherthan a legal concept and because individual franchise agreements contain a widevariety of terms, it is impossible to give a single legal definition which would beuniversally valid. Instead, the use of the term "franchise" varies from country to

29 E.g., J. Thomas McCarthy, "Trademark Franchising and Antitrust: The Trouble withTie-ins", 58 California Law Review (1970), pp. 1085 and 1089.

30 L. W. Melville, Precedents on intellectual property and international licensing, 2ndéd., London, 1972, p. 270.

31 E.g., J. Thomas McCarthy, op. cit., loc. cit.

163

country and even within a given legal system.32 Indeed, in many countries the termis not known at all. The same commercial agreements called franchises in othercountries are denominated as "concessions" or regarded as ordinary trade marklicense agreements which contain additional terms.33

It follows from the above indications that the mere reference to franchisesgranted by foreign companies to local entities established in Southern Rhodesia asan area in which the Security Council Committee [established in pursuance of res-olution 253 (1968) concerning the question of Southern Rhodesia] may wish torecommend possible restrictions or outright prohibitions would probably not, byreason of its vagueness, achieve the results sought by the Security Council Com-mittee. It is suggested that, instead, reference should be made to the separateelements, such as the licensing of a trade mark or the transfer of know-how, whichmay form the content of a franchise agreement. If it were decided to draw up sucha list of commercial agreements, the Office of Legal Affairs would be happy to assistthe Committee in the preparation thereof.3'1

3 September 1975

10. GUIDELINES FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF GENERAL ASSEMBLY RESOLUTIONS GRANT-TING OBSERVER STATUS ON A REGULAR BASIS TO CERTAIN REGIONAL INTERGOVERN-MENTAL ORGANIZATIONS, THE PALESTINE LIBERATION ORGANIZATION AND THENATIONAL LIBERATION MOVEMENTS IN AFRICA

Note for the use of the Secretariat

1. The General Assembly has adopted a number of resolutions inviting certainorganizations to participate on a regular basis in its meetings or conferences as ob-

32 E.g., differences of terminology and substantive development in the United States andEurope are examined by Jean Guyénot, "La franchise commerciale", 26 Revue trimestriellede droit commercial, 1973, No. 2, p. 11.

33 The California Franchise Investment Act (Cal. Corp. Code § 31005 (West Supp.1971)) which is a recent statute intended to eliminate certain abuses on the part of fran-chisors describes a franchise as an agreement by which:

"(a) A franchisee is granted the right to engage in the business of offering, sellingor distributing goods or services under a marketing plan or system prescribed insubstantial part by a franchisor; and

"(b) The operation of the franchisee's business pursuant to such plan or systemis substantially associated with the franchisor's trade mark, service mark, trade name,logotype, advertising or other commercial symbol designating the franchisor or itsaffiliate; and

"(c) The franchisee is required to pay, directly or indirectly, a franchise fee."34 In its special report to the Security Council (S/11913, para. 13), the Committee,

while bearing in mind the reservations expressed by some delegations as summarized in theAnnex to the report, decided to recommend to the Security Council that insurance, tradename and franchises should be included within the scope of the mandatory sanctions againstSouthern Rhodesia.

At its 1907th meeting, on 6 April 1976, the Security Council had before it a fifteen-power draft resolution (S/12037), operative paragraph 2 of which read as follows:

"The Security Council,u

"2. Decides that all Member States shall take appropriate measures to preventtheir nationals and persons in their Territories from granting to any commercial, indus-trial or public utility undertaking in Southern Rhodesia the right to use any trade nameor from entering into any franchising agreement involving the use of any trade name,trade mark or registered design in connexion with the sale or distribution of any pro-ducts, commodities or services of such an undertaking;".

The Council adopted the draft resolution unanimously.

164

servers. The purpose of the present note is to provide some guidelines concerning theprocedure and arrangements for the implementation of those resolutions particularlyby the Secretariat.

2. The relevant resolutions are the following:Resolution 253 (HI) of 16 October 1948: invitation of the Organization of

American StatesResolution 477 (V) of 1 November 1950: invitation of the League of Arab

StatesResolution 2011 (XX) of 11 October 1965: invitation of the Organization of

African UnityResolution 3208 (XXIX) of 11 October 1974: invitation of the European

Economic CommunityResolution 3209 (XXIX) of 11 October 1974: invitation of Council of Mutual

Economic AssistanceResolution 3237 (XXIX) of 22 November 1974: invitation of the Palestine

Liberation OrganizationResolution 3280 (XXIX) of 10 December 1974: invitation of the national

liberation movements recognized by the Organization of African Unity35

Where appropriate, the similarities and differences in the terms of those resolutions,in so far as they relate to practical arrangements, are indicated.

I. Invitation and representation

A. Notification of sessions

(a) Addressees3. Notification of sessions of the General Assembly should be addressed to

the administrative heads of OAS, AOU and the League of Arab States as indicatedin resolutions 253 (III), 477 (V) and 2011 (XX).

4. The notifications with respect to the sessions and the work of the GeneralAssembly or to the convening of an international conference under the auspices of theGeneral Assembly should in the case of EEC, CMEA and PLO be addressed directlyto the organization concerned in accordance with resolutions 3208 (XXIX), 3209(XXIX) and 3237 (XXIX).

5. In the case of the African national liberation movements, a communicationshould be addressed in the first instance to the OAU requesting a list of movementsrecognized by that Organization and only subsequently should individual notificationsbe addressed to the designated national liberation movements.

(b) Content of notifications6. The letter of notification should refer to the relevant authorizing resolution.

A copy of the provisional agenda, if issued, should be forwarded. The letter shouldrequest the designation of a representative or representatives to the session or con-ference.

B. Protocol matters and facilities7. Passes appropriate to observers should be issued by the Protocol Office.8. Use of facilities at United Nations or conference sites, such as facilities for

issuing press releases, holding press conferences, paging and catering, should be grantedconsistent with the status of observer.

35 At its thirtieth session, the General Assembly, by resolution 3369 (XXX) of 10October 1975, decided to invite the Islamic Conference to participate in the sessions andthe work of the General Assembly and of its subsidiary organs in the capacity of observer.

165

9. The letter from an observer organization or movement designating a represen-tative or representatives does not constitute "credentials" within the meaning of therelevant rules of procedure and is not examined by the Credentials Committee estab-lished at the session or conference.

10. The names of the designated representative or representatives should beincluded in the attendance list of the session or conference under an appropriate heading.

II. Participation

A. Forum

(a) General Assembly and Main Committees

11. Resolutions 253 (III), 477 (V), 2011 (XX), 3208 (XXIX), 3209 (XXIX)and 3237 (XXIX) refer to "sessions" of the General Assembly. OAS, the League ofArab States, OAU, EEC, CMEA and PLO are therefore entitled to participate, asobservers in both plenary and Main Committee meetings, although in practice theirparticipation in plenary is limited to seating and not extended to making statements.

12. Resolution 3280 (XXIX) provides for participation as observers by nationalliberation movements in Africa recognized by OAU "in the relevant work of theMain Committees of the General Assembly and its subsidiary organs concerned".The national liberation movements may therefore participate in relevant meetings ofMain Committees but not in plenary.

(b) Subsidiary organs of the General Assembly

13. Resolutions 3208 (XXIX), 3209 (XXIX) and 3237 (XXIX) refer to "thesessions and the work of the General Assembly". This phrase would appear primafacie to be all inclusive and to embrace subsidiary organs of the Assembly. However,the possibility of participation by observers in the work of particular subsidiary organswould seem also to depend upon the terms of reference, structure, functions andmethods of work of the organ in question. It is reasonable to assume that in principleparticipation by observers in the sessions and the work of the Assembly under thosethree resolutions is not meant to be more than that accorded to Member States ofthe United Nations which are not members of the organ concerned.

14. As stated above, under resolution 3280 (XXIX) national liberation move-ments in Africa are invited to participate in the relevant work of the Main Committeesof the Assembly and its subsidiary organs concerned.

(c) International conferences

15. In resolution 3237 (XXIX), the General Assembly invites the PLO "toparticipate in the sessions and the work of all international conferences convenedunder the auspices of the General Assembly" (para. 2) and considers that the PLO"is entitled to participate in the sessions and the work of all international conferencesconvened under the auspices of other organs of the United Nations (para.3)." Thelatter provision is a strong recommendation to other organs, such as the Economicand Social Council, to take decision to invite the PLO to participate in internationalconferences convened by it.

16. Under resolution 3280 (XXIX), African liberation movements are invitedto participate "in conferences, seminars and other meetings held under the auspicesof the United Nations which relate to their countries" (emphasis added).

B. Seating arrangements

(a) Physical arrangement17. In the Assembly Hall, the established practice is to seat observers in areas

normally reserved for them. The practice in Main Committees has been to seat the

166

observer on the floor of the Committee room with a name plate only when and if heparticipates.

(b) Permanent seating or limited seating

18. Resolutions 253 (III), 477 (V), 2011 (XX), 3208 (XXIX), 3209 (XXIX)and 3237 (XXIX) do not contain language which would appear to limit the participa-tion of these organizations to items of particular interest although a general rule hasdeveloped through practice according to which observers participate only with regard toitems in which they have a functional interest. This is clearly spelled out in resolution3280 (XXIX) on the other hand which provides for participation "in the relevantwork" of the Main Committees or subsidiary organs. The travaux préparatoires ofresolutions 3208 (XXIX) and 3209(XXIX) confirm this.36

III. Procedural rights at meetings

19. On the basis of past practice and in the light of more recent developments,participation by an observer includes the right to make oral statements, including theright of reply.

20. An observer may have his written statements or documents circulated bythe Secretariat to all delegations. The rules of procedure of some recent conferencesinclude provisions on this point.37 Written statements by African liberation movementsrecognized by OAU were circulated in the Fourth Committee by decision of theChairman at the twenty-seventh, twenty-eighth and twenty-ninth sessions of the GeneralAssembly.

21. Observers do not have the right to vote and are not entitled to sponsor orco-sponsor substantive proposals (including amendments) or procedural motions, orto raise points of order or challenge rulings.

31 January 1975

11. RULING BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE TWENTY-NINTH SESSION OF THE GENERALASSEMBLY REGARDING THE POSITION OF THE DELEGATION OF SOUTH AFRICA—QUESTION WHETHER SUCH A RULING SHOULD BE CONSIDERED AUTOMATICALLYAPPLICABLE AT THE SEVENTH SPECIAL SESSION OF THE ASSEMBLY, SCHEDULEDTO OPEN BEFORE THE OFFICIAL CLOSURE OF THE TWENTY-NINTH REGULAR SESSION

Memorandum to the Under-Secretary-General for Political and General Assembly Affairs

1. The question has arisen whether the ruling made by the President of theGeneral Assembly at the twenty-ninth session regarding the position of the delegationof South Africa will be automatically applicable at the seventh special session. Thisruling was made at the 2281st plenary meeting, on 12 November 1974, under item 3of the agenda, entitled "Credentials of representatives to the twenty-ninth session ofthe General Assembly". It related to the first report of the Credentials Committee(A/9779)38 at the twenty-ninth session, in which the Committee rejected the credentials

36 See A/PV.2266.37 See for example, rule 59(2) of the rules of procedure of the United Nations Con-

ference on the Representation of States in their Relations with International Organizations(Official Records of the United Nations Conference on the Representation of States in theirRelations with International Organizations, Summary records of the plenary meeting and ofthe meetings of the Committee of the Whole (A/CONF.67/18—United Nations publication,Sales No. E.75.V.11) and rule 63(2) of the rules of procedure of the Third United NationsConference on the Law of the Sea (A/CONF.62/30/Rev.l—United Nations publication,Sales No. E.74.I.18).

38 Official Records of the General Assembly, Twenty-ninth Session, Annexes, agendaitem 3.

167

submitted on behalf of the delegation of South Africa, the Committee's report beingapproved by the General Assembly in its resolution 3206 (XXIX) of 30 September1974. These credentials "authorized and appointed" certain persons named therein"to represent the Government of the Republic of South Africa at the twenty-ninthregular session of the General Assembly of the United Nations."

2. In his ruling, the President drew attention to the fact that "Since its twenty-fifth session the General Assembly has been regularly rejecting, each year, the creden-tials . . ." of South Africa. He referred to the ruling made by the President of theGeneral Assembly at the twenty-fifth session in 1970, regarding South African partici-pation in the Assembly, as a ruling which related only to the wording of an amendmentthen before the Assembly, and said: "That opinion did not mean that if the amendmenthad been worded in some other way it might not have had different consequences forthe legal position of the South African delegation in this Assembly." The Presidentruled "that the General Assembly refuses to allow the delegation of South Africato participate in its work." He did so "as President of the twenty-ninth session of theGeneral Assembly", and he stated that his interpretation referred "exclusively to theposition of the delegation of South Africa within the strict framework of the rules ofprocedure of the General Assembly."39

3. Under the Assembly's rules of procedure, credentials are separately examinedat each session of the Assembly, and a subsequent session is not bound by any decisionsof a previous session regarding credentials. The history of the question of SouthAfrica's credentials in the Assembly, the subject of a separate decision at each sessionsince 1970, bears this out. In addition, from the context as described above of thePresident's ruling at the twenty-ninth session, it is clear that that ruling was meantto be confined to the twenty-ninth session. The need for a separate decision at eachsession applies equally to special sessions and to regular sessions. The ruling of thePresident at the twenty-ninth session therefore will have no automatic application atthe seventh special session, and any decisions or rulings at that session regardingcredentials will have to be made under item 3 of the provisional agenda of the seventhspecial session, which is entitled "Credentials of representatives to the seventh specialsession of the General Assembly".

4. It is immaterial to the position set out above that the seventh special sessionwill be held at a time when the twenty-ninth regular session will still not have beenofficially closed. The seventh special session is entirely separate from the twenty-ninthregular session and will take its own decisions regarding credentials. This is borne outby practice. For example, the sixth special session was held in 1974 at a time whenthe twenty-eighth regular session had not been closed, and the sixth special sessionnevertheless established its own credentials committee, and took a separate decisionregarding credentials for that session (resolution 3200 (S-VI) of 30 April 1974).

27 August 1975

12. QUESTION WHETHER THE SECRETARY-GENERAL AND THE ADMINISTRATIVECOMMITTEE ON CO-ORDINATION COULD LEGALLY TAKE STEPS TO GIVE EFFECT TOPROPOSALS IN REGARD TO THE POST-ADJUSTMENT SYSTEM DESIGNED TO REMEDYCERTAIN DEFICIENCIES IN THE PRESENT SYSTEM OR WHETHER SUCH PROPOSALSINVOLVING SUBSTANTIAL INCREASES IN EXPENDITURE SHOULD BE LEFT FOR THEGENERAL ASSEMBLY

Memorandum to the Secretary, Administrative Committee on Co-ordination1. You have asked for a legal opinion on the question, raised in the Administrative

Committee on Co-ordination at its sixty-fourth session, whether the Secretary-General

39A/PV.2281, pp. 73-75 and 76.

168

and the ACC could legally take steps to give effect to proposals like those recentlymade by UNESCO and GATT in regard to the post adjustment system, or whetherdecisions in regard to such proposals should be left for the General Assembly. Thoseproposals are designed to remedy certain deficiencies of the present system, particularlywith respect to staff without dependants and to some extent with respect to staff inthe higher grades, when the value of the United Nations currency of account declinesin relation to local currencies, and both proposals involve separating the effects ofcurrency fluctuations from those of changes in the cost of living in the calculation ofpost adjustments. Since the reason for the proposals is to remedy a serious impairmentof the value of compensation for portions of the staff, it is evident that giving effect tothem is very likely, at least in the short run, to involve a substantial increase in theexpense of post adjustments.

2. In the United Nations, the Charter provides in Article 17, paragraph 1,that "The General Assembly shall consider and approve the budget of the Organization".Thus the General Assembly always remains the ultimate budgeting authority, andwhile it may on occasion authorize the Secretary-General, in consultation withappropriate bodies, to take decisions involving an increase in expenditure in orderto meet changing circumstances, such authorization must always be explicit. In thepresent case, no such authorization exists, and it appears rather that the GeneralAssembly has reserved the problem for its own consideration. It follows that theSecretary-General and the ACC cannot, without the approval of the Assembly, takesteps to give effect to proposals like those here under discussion.

3. Post adjustments are paid to United Nations staff in pursuance of Annex I,paragraph 9, of the Staff Regulations, which provides:

"In order to preserve equivalent standards of living at different offices, theSecretary-General may adjust the basic salaries set forth in paragraphs 1 and 3of the annex by the application of non-pensionable relative costs of living,standards of living and related factors at the office concerned as compared toNew York. Such post adjustments shall not be subject to the staff assessmentplan and their amount shall vary by salary level as determined from time totime by the General Assembly."

The amounts of post adjustments are thus set by the General Assembly, and theSecretary-General cannot alter them on his own authority; his function is the "applica-tion" of the post adjustments already decided on. While Staff Rule 103.7 (d) doesallow him to "establish a schedule of post adjustments for any duty station which, byreason of cost of living, standard of living and related factors, cannot appropriately beplaced within the schedules", he is not entitled to alter schedules approved by theAssembly, and even less to alter the mode of calculation which has been used toestablish them.

4. At its last session the General Assembly adopted resolution 3357 (XXIX) of18 December 1974, to which is annexed the Statute of the International Civil ServiceCommission. Article 10 of that Statute provides that:

"The Commission shall make recommendations to the General Assembly on:"(a) the broad principles for the determination of the conditions of service

of the staff;"(£) the scales of salaries and post adjustments for staff in the Professional

and higher categories; . . ."This provision implies that changes in the system of calculating post adjustments willbe considered by the ICSC in the first instance, that it will make recommendations (butnot decisions) relating thereto, and that decisions regarding such recommendationswill be taken by the Assembly itself.

169

5. The effect of currency instability on the general financial situation of theUnited Nations has long preoccupied the General Assembly, which has accepted thepost adjustment system, as established by it, as the means to remedy the consequencesof that instability in regard to the compensation of professional and higher staff. Atits twenty-eighth session (2206th meeting), the Assembly established a WorkingGroup on Currency Instability, which met between sessions to study the situation, butfound no generally agreed alternatives to existing policies. Accordingly, at its nextsession, the Assembly adopted resolution 3360 (XXIX) of 18 December 1974, whichregistered the lack of agreement and simply requested

". . . the Secretary-General, in consultation with the other members of theAdministrative Committee on Co-ordination, to keep these problems under review,taking into account the report of the Working Group, the views expressed duringthe consideration of the item during the twenty-ninth session, and other views thatmay be expressed by or received from Member States, and to report to theGeneral Assembly at its thirtieth session."

That resolution is certainly not an invitation to the Secretary-General or the ACCto take direct action on the problem as it affects staff compensation.

6. Finally, it may be added that under the WAP A40 scheme, post adjustmentsare closely linked with both contributions to and benefits from the United NationsJoint Staff Pension Fund, and that this linkage would require reconsideration by theGeneral Assembly in connexion with modification of the post adjustment system.

7. It is therefore concluded, as stated above in paragraph 2, that authority doesnot exist to implement the proposals of UNESCO and GATT without legislative action.

14 May 1975

13. QUESTION WHETHER, PENDING ACTION BY THE ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COUNCIL,THE ECONOMIC COMMISSION FOR WESTERN ASIA MAY INVITE THE PALESTINELIBERATION ORGANIZATION TO PARTICIPATE IN ITS SESSION AS AN OBSERVERTAKING INTO ACCOUNT GENERAL ASSEMBLY RESOLUTION 3237 (XXIX)

Opinion prepared at the request of the Secretariat of theEconomic Commission for Western Asia

1. General Assembly resolution 3237 (XXIX) of 22 November 1974 concerninginvitations to the Palestine Liberation Organization does not expressly deal with theparticipation of the PLO in the sessions of the Economic and Social Council or itssubsidiary organs and the Council has not as yet taken decisions in this regard, althoughaction is expected at the present (fifty-eighth) session in connexion with the Council'sreview of its rules of procedure.41 Pending action by the Council, resolution 3237(XXIX) provides strong policy guidelines in accordance with which ECWA mightitself invite the PLO to participate in its sessions in the capacity of observer. In thisconnexion, it may be noted that the Commission on Human Rights, a functional

40 World average post adjustment.41 By resolution 1949 (LVIII) of 8 May 1975, the Council decided to adopt as its rules

of procedure, with effect from the close of the fifty-eighth session, the rules of procedureannexed to the resolution. Rule 73 of those rules entitled "Participation of national liberationmovements" reads as follows:

"The Council may invite any national liberation movement recognized by or inaccordance with resolutions of the General Assembly to participate, without the rightto vote, in its deliberations on any matter of particular concern to that movement."

170

commission of the Economic and Social Council, did invite the PLO to participateas an observer in its recent session in Geneva.42

2. On the basis of past practice and in the light of more recent developments,participation by an observer includes the right to make oral statements, including theright of reply. An observer may have his written statements or documents circulatedby the Secretariat to all delegations.

3. It is axiomatic that observers do not have the right to vote—a right whichmay only be accorded to full members. Likewise, in the General Assembly and itssubsidiary organs, observers are not entitled to sponsor or co-sponsor substantiveproposals (including amendments) or procedural motions, or to raise points of orderor challenge rulings. In the Economic and Social Council, observers of Member States,non-members of the Council, have been accorded the right to submit proposals whichmay be put to the vote by request of any member.43 This provision is retained in thedraft devised rules of procedure44 which have been prepared for submission to theCouncil at its present session.45 On the other hand, the draft rule dealing with nationalliberation movements reads as follows:

"Observers designated by national liberation movements recognized by or inaccordance with resolutions of the General Assembly may participate without theright to vote at meetings of the Council, its committees and sessional bodies andtheir subsidiary bodies."46

4. As this rule, unlike the one concerning non-member State, does not providean entitlement to sponsor proposals, the general practice excluding such right shouldprevail.

1 May 1975

14. QUESTION WHETHER ADMISSION TO MEMBERSHIP IN THE UNITED NATIONS OF ASTATE WITHIN THE GEOGRAPHICAL SCOPE OF THE ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COM-MISSION FOR ASIA AND THE PACIFIC AUTOMATICALLY ENTITLES SUCH A STATE TOMEMBERSHIP IN THE COMMISSION

1. I refer to your memorandum of 21 October 1975 on the question of themembership in the Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (ESCAP)47

of a recently admitted Member of the United Nations within the geographical scope ofthe Commission. You ask in particular whether formal steps should be taken by theCommission (presumably at its next session in 1976) to admit the Member State inquestion as a full member of ESCAP in accordance with paragraph 3 of the termsof reference of the Commission48 and whether a draft resolution would have to besubmitted to the Economic and Social Council.

2. We have always held that the application of the proviso of paragraph 3 ofthe terms of reference of ESCAP is automatic. In other words, a State which has

42 See Official Records of the Economic and Social Council, Fifty-eighth Session, Supple-ment No. 4 (E/5635), decision 2 (XXXI).

«See Juridical Yearbook, 1971, p. 203.44 E/5677, Annex.45 Rule 72 A of the draft revised rules of procedure (E/5677).46 The provision in question is to be found in paragraph 3 of rule 72 of the revised rules

of procedure.47 Formerly ECAFE.48 See Official Records of the Economic and Social Council, Fifty-ninth Session, Supple-

ment No. 7 (E/5656), Annex III, p. 143. The proviso in question reads: "...provided thatany State in the area which may hereafter become a Member of the United Nations shallbe thereupon admitted as a member of the Commission".

171

been admitted to membership in the United Nations does not have to wait for adecision of the Commission to become a member of the Commission. The provisoof paragraph 3 referred to above is couched in mandatory terms. The use therein ofthe word "admitted" does not imply that the State concerned requires a formal actionof admission by the Commission. This interpretation is confirmed by the French textof the proviso which uses the word "deviendrait" and by the following precedents.

3. By resolution 1134 (XII) of 17 September 1957, the General Assemblyadmitted the Federation of Malaya as a Member of the United Nations. The reportof the Economic Commission for Asia and the Far East on its fourteenth sessionheld from 5 to 15 March 1958 stated that "the Commission was gratified to note thatthe General Assembly, by its resolution 1134 (XII) of 17 September 1957, hadadmitted the Federation of Malaya as a Member of the United Nations, and that,in accordance with article 3 of the terms of reference of the Commission, the Federa-tion of Malaya had become a member of the Commission.. ,".49 The fourteenth ses-sion of ECAFE was held in fact at Kuala Lumpur and at the first meeting of thesession the Commission heard a statement by the President of the Federation ofMalaya. The Under-Secretary-General for Economic and Social Affairs then read amessage from the Secretary-General congratulating the Federation of Malaya onhaving become a member of ECAFE.50 At the same meeting, the head of the delegationof the Federation of Malaya was elected Chairman of the Commission. Moreover,the agenda for the Commission at that session did not contain any item on theadmission of the Federation of Malaya to membership in ECAFE.

4. By resolution 2010 (XX) of 21 September 1965, the General Assemblyadmitted Singapore to membership in the United Nations. In the report of ECAFEon the work of its twenty-second session held from 22 March to 4 April 1966,51

under the heading "Membership and attendance", Singapore was listed among mem-bers of the Commission. As in the case of the Federation of Malaya, the agenda ofthe Commission for its twenty-second session did not contain an item on the admissionof Singapore to membership in ECAFE.

5. It should be noted that both the Federation of Malaya and Singapore priorto their admission as Members of the United Nations were associate members ofECAFE.

6. In view of the foregoing, no resolution by the Commission would be requiredfor the Member State concerned to become a member of ESCAP.

4 November 1975

15. QUESTION OF ASSOCIATE MEMBERSHIP IN THE ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMISSIONFOR ASIA AND THE PACIFIC OF THE TWO DEPENDENT TERRITORIES—THE GILBERTISLANDS AND TUVALU—RESULTING FROM THE SEPARATION OF THE ELLICE ISLANDSFROM THE FORMER GILBERT AND ELLICE ISLANDS COLONY

Memorandum to the Chief of the Regional Commissions Section,Department of Economic and Social Affairs

1. With reference to your memorandum of 5 November, we arc now in aposition to advise as follows.

2. By a letter dated 24 September 1975 addressed to the Secretary-General,the Permanent Representative of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern

49 Official Records of the Economic and Social Council, Twenty-sixth Session, Supple-ment No. 2 (E/3102), para. 258.

wibid., para. 218.51 Ibid., Forty-first Session, Supplement No. 2 (E/4180/Rev.l), para. 337

172

Ireland drew attention to the fact that, as from 1 October 1975, the Ellice Islandswould be separated from the Gilber t and Ellice Islands Colony to form a new dependentterritory with the name of Tuvalu. The remainder of the present colony would thentake the name of Gilbert Islands. Me further stated that this separation took placewith the full consent of the Government of the Gilbert and Ellice Islands and followinga referendum which was observed by a Visiting Mission of the Special Committee onthe Situation with Regard to the Implementation of the Declaration on the Grantingof Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples (A/C.4/786).

3. At its 2171st meeting on 19 November 1975, the Fourth Committee of theGeneral Assembly adopted by consensus a draft resolution (A/C.4/L.1106) underthe subtitle "Question of the Gilbert Islands". Introducing the draft resolution at theprevious meeting, the representative of Sierra Leone stated that a striking feature ofthe draft resolution was that it pertained only to the Gilbert Islands, and not to theEllice Islands, because of the referendum held the previous year in which the peopleof the Ellice Islands had opted for separate administration. He commended the factthat the separation had been carried out without incident. The Territory of the GilbertIslands, he said, was, to a large extent, self-governing and therefore qualified for aseparate draft resolution,52

4. At its 2176th meeting on 28 November 1975, the Fourth Committee, by avote of 111 in favour to 1 against with 10 abstentions, adopted a draft resolution(A/C.4/L.1115) under the subtitle "Question of the New Hebrides, Pitcairn andTuvalu" (italics added).

5. As both draft resolutions are expected to be adopted by the General Assembly,it is clear that the Assembly recognizes the separation of the two territories.53 Insofaras their associate membership in ESCAP is concerned, it will be for the Governmentof the United Kingdom to request, if it so wishes, separate associate membership forthe two Territories. Once such a request is made, Gilbert Islands will remain anassociate member of ESCAP and Tuvalu may be admitted by the Commission toassociate membership. Alternatively, the Commission may decide that henceforth thetwo Territories will have separate associate membership. In either case, the conse-quential change to be made by the Economic and Social Council in paragraphs 2and 4 of the terms of reference of the Commission •will be of an editorial character.54

Since under paragraph 5 of its terms of reference35 the Commission has the authorityto admit territories to associate membership, no action by the Economic and SocialCouncil is required.56

2 December 1975

52A/C.4/SR.2170, p. 5.53 Both draft resolutions were adopted by the General Assembly at its 2431st meeting,

on 8 December 1975, the first one by consensus and the second one by a recorded vote of121 votes to 1, with 11 abstentions, thus becoming respectively General Assembly resolu-tions 3426 (XXX) and 3433 (XXX).

54 For the terms of reference of ESCAP, see Official Records of the Economic and SocialCouncil, Fifty-ninth Session, Supplement No. 7 (E/5656), Annex III, p. 143.

55 Paragraph 5 of the terms of reference of ESCAP reads as follows:"Any territory, part or group of territories within the geographical scope of the

Commission as defined in paragraph 2 may, on presentation of its application to theCommission by the member responsible for the international relations of such territory,part or group of territories, be admitted by the Commission as an associate memberof the Commission. If it has become responsible for its own international relations,such territory, part or group of territories, may be admitted as an associate member ofthe Commission on itself presenting its application to the Commission."56At its thirty-second session (24 March-2 April 1976), the Economic and Social

Commission for Asia and the Pacific observed that the Government of the United Kingdom

173

16. FIFTH UNITED NATIONS CONGRESS ON THE PREVENTION OF CRIME AND THETREATMENT OF OFFENDERS—QUESTION OF ISSUING INVITATIONS TO STATES NOTMEMBERS OF THE UNITED NATIONS AND TO INDIVIDUAL PARTICIPANTS FROMSUCH STATES

Memorandum to the Assistant Director, Crime Prevention and CriminalJustice Section

1. May I refer to your memorandum dated 26 February 1975 in which yourequested advice on the invitations that you, in your capacity as Executive Secretary,may be required to issue to non-member States of the United Nations and to individualparticipants from such States.

2. At the outset, it is recalled that the intention is to admit five categories ofparticipants to the Congress. With respect to three of these categories, namely—

(1) Observers from liberation movements;(2) Observers from specialized agencies, intergovernmental or non-governmental

organizations;

(3) Officials of the Secretariat,

the issue on which you requested advice would not arise.

3. I shall therefore limit myself to commenting on the invitation of the tworemaining categories which in rule 1 of the draft provisional rules of procedure57 aredescribed as follows:

(a) Members officially designated by their Governments as delegates to theCongress, and

(b) Individual members having a direct interest in the field of crime preventionand criminal justice, including representatives of criminological institutes

had informed the Executive Secretary (document E/CN.11/1260/INF) that, on the separa-tion of the Ellice Islands from the Gilberts on 1 October 1975, the name of the Gilbert andEllice Islands Colony had been changed to that of the Gilbert Islands, and that the respon-sibilities accepted by the Gilbert and Ellice Islands as an associate member of ESCAP werehenceforth assumed by the Gilbert Islands. The Commission also noted that the Governmentof the United Kingdom had informed the Executive Secretary (document E/CN.l 1/1261 /INF), in accordance with article 5 of the Commission's terms of reference and at the re-quest of the Government of the territory concerned, of the application of Tuvalu, the formerEllice Islands, for admission as an associate member of the Commission. The Commissionunanimously decided that Tuvalu be admitted as an associate member of ESCAP and includedwithin its geographical scope. It recommended that the Economic and Social Council approvethe consequential amendments to paragraphs 2 and 4 of the Commission's terms of referenceand adopted a draft resolution to that effect for action by the Council.

57 A/CONF.56/2. Rule 1 of the rules of procedure as adopted by the Congress readsas follows:

"The Congress shall include four categories of participants:"(a) Members officially designated by their Governments as delegates to the

Congress;"(6) Individual members having a direct interest in the field of crime prevention

and criminal justice, including representatives of criminological institutes and of nationalorganizations concerned with crime prevention and criminal justice;

"(c) Observers designated by national liberation movements invited to the Con-gress;

"(rf) Observers from the specialized agencies of the United Nations, or fromother intergovernmental organizations or from non-governmental organizations in con-sultative status with the Economic and Social Council and interested in the matters beforethe Congress."

174

and of national organizations concerned with crime prevention and criminaljustice.

4. The basic authorization for the Secretariat to arrange the Congress iscontained in General Assembly resolution 415(V) adopted on 1 December 1950.Neither the resolution nor its annex contain specific provisions on the categories ofgovernments or individuals entitled to receive invitations to the recurring Congresses.In this connexion, section (d) of the annex limits itself to stating that "The UnitedNations shall convene every five years an international congress similar to thosepreviously organized by the IPPC". The only resolution specifically concerned withthe Fifth Congress is General Assembly resolution 3139 (XXVIII) which containsno directives on participation but "requests the Secretary-General to ensure that theSecretariat's preparatory work for the Congress is fully adequate for its successfuloutcome."

5. In the absence of specific directives by a deliberative body, the Secretariatshould act in conformity with the present practice followed by the General Assemblyin convening international conferences of the United Nations. In recent years anduntil its twenty-eighth session, the General Assembly's practice was to invite repre-sentatives of States Members of the United Nations or members of a specializedagency or of the International Atomic Energy Agency or parties to the Statute ofthe International Court of Justice. However, in several resolutions at its twenty-eighthsession, the General Assembly adopted a formula inviting "all States" to the con-ferences convened by it. With this development, it is clear that the criterion hasbecome which entities are considered by the General Assembly to be States, a questionwhich must be determined on the basis of unequivocal indications by the GeneralAssembly. At the present time, in addition to States included in the formula in useuntil the twenty-eighth session, the General Assembly has indicated that the DemocraticRepublic of Vietnam is considered to be a State. This was done in resolution 3067(XXVIII) and in resolution 3104 (XXVIII) in which the Democratic Republic ofVietnam was expressly designated as a State in connexion with its invitation to,respectively, the Third United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea and theUnited Nations Conference on Prescription (Limitation) in the International Sale ofGoods.58

6. In view of the foregoing, it would be appropriate for you as the ExecutiveSecretary of the Congress to issue invitations to the States Members of the UnitedNations or members of the specialized agencies or the International Atomic EnergyAgency and States Parties to the Statute of the International Court of Justice andalso to the Democratic Republic of Vietnam.

7. The individual members referred to under paragraph 3 (b) above constitutea special category which has participated in past Congresses. The Office of LegalAffairs in a memorandum dated 18 April 1969 advised the Officer-in-Charge of theSocial Development Division on the history and scope of the provision on admissionof individual members, in particular regarding the issuance of information circularsto Individual members of past Congresses. The memorandum reached the followingconclusion:

"It is clear from the historical background that the intention is to seek thewidest possible participation of experts in the Congress, which is of a technical

58 The Democratic Republic of Vietnam has since become a member of WHO and ITU.

175

character Since the right to vote at the Congress is accorded only to thoseexperts who are governmental delegates, the participation of individuals doesnot give rise to the question of the legal status of their Governments vis-à-visthe United Nations. Consequently there is no legal difficulty in distributing theinformation circular among past individual participants. It is, however, notappropriate to refer to them in United Nations documents as individual participants"from non-member States", for the use of the term "non-member States" wouldinvolve the Secretariat in a political judgement which the Secretary-General hasconsistently declined to make. In this connexion I should like to suggest thatin the next report by the Secretariat on the Congress, it would be better not tolist the individual participants under the countries of which they are nationals,since nationality is not the criterion of their participation."

8. There appears to be no legal grounds to deviate from the practice followedin respect of admission of individual members to past Congresses, as that practice isstated in the above excerpt from the Legal Office's memorandum of 18 April 1969.To ensure consistency with the reason for their selection as participants, we wouldwish, however, to reiterate our advice that it would be preferable not to list theindividual members by countries of their nationality in the official documentation ofthe Congress. With respect to those from any area not covered in paragraph 6 above,their selection shall also be on the basis of their individual expertise and not becauseof affiliation with any institute or organizations having any governmental character.

7 March 1975

17. QUESTION WHETHER THE UNITED NATIONS SPECIAL FUND MAY GIVE ASSISTANCETO NATIONAL LIBERATION MOVEMENTS UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THE GENERALASSEMBLY RESOLUTIONS ESTABLISHING THE FUND AND DEFINING ITS OPERATIONS

Statement made by the Legal Counsel at the 8th meeting (first session) of the Boardof Governors of the United Nations Special Fund on 4 April 1975

The question was raised at the fifth and sixth meetings of the Board of Gov-ernors, during the discussion of the rules of procedure of the Board, whether theSpecial Fund may give assistance to national liberation movements.

This question of course is one that depends not on the rules of procedure ofthe Board but on the resolutions of the General Assembly establishing the SpecialFund and defining its operations, that is, resolutions 3202 (S-VI) of 1 May 1974 and3356 (XXIX) of 18 December 1974. Article I, entitled "Purpose", of the provisionsadopted by resolution 3356 (XXIX) specifies that the Special Fund "shall provideemergency relief and development assistance to the countries most seriously affectedin accordance with the relevant provisions of section X of General Assembly resolution3202 (S-VI) of 1 May 1974" (emphasis added); the three paragraphs of Article VIsimilarly refer to "countries most seriously affected" or to "developing countries".

The use of the word "countries" would appear to preclude assistance to entitiesother than States. This interpretation is reinforced by the relevant section (Section X.Special Programme) of resolution 3202 (S-VI), which sets out in paragraph (c) thecriteria for determining the countries to which emergency assistance should begranted. All of these criteria, such as ratio of import costs to export earnings, or ofdebt servicing to export earnings, or the relative importance of foreign trade in thedevelopment process, are such as cannot be applied to entities other than States.

176

18. ESTABLISHMENT BY THE WORLD FOOD CONFERENCE OF AN INTERNATIONAL FUNDFOR AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT—CONVENING BY THE SECRETARY-GENERAL,AT THE REQUEST OF THE CONFERENCE, OF A "MEETING OF INTERESTED COUN-TRIES" TO WORK OUT THE DETAILS OF THE FUND—QUESTION WHETHER THEUNITED NATIONS is RESPONSIBLE FOR THE EXPENSES OF THE MEETING AND ITSAd Hoc WORKING GROUP

Memorandum to the Acting Controller, Office of Financial Services

1. I refer to your memorandum of 8 August 1975 in which you have askedfor our advice on the following questions:

(1) What is the legal relationship between the United Nations, on the onehand, and the "meeting of interested countries"59 and the Ad Hoc WorkingGroup it established, on the other?

(2) Is there any basis for payment of the expenses of the "meeting of interestedcountries" and of the Ad Hoc Working Group?

2. Paragraph 5 of resolution XIII adopted by the World Food Conferenceprovides that:

"The Secretary-General of the United Nations should be requested toconvene urgently a meeting of all interested countries, mentioned in paragraph 3above, and institutions to work out the details, including the size of, and com-mitments to, the Fundj'lIn operative paragraph 5 of its resolution 3348 (XXIX), the General Assembly

"Requests the Secretary-General and the executive heads of the subsidiaryorgans of the General Assembly and of the specialized agencies to take expeditiousaction in line with the resolutions adopted at the World Food Conference;".

3. From the legal point of view, where a conference convened by the UnitedNations requests the Secretary-General to perform certain functions, such a requestmust be approved by the competent organ of the Organization before the Secretary-General could undertake the said functions. In the present case, it is clear from theabove-quoted provisions of resolution 3348 (XXIX) that the General Assembly hasendorsed the request of the World Food Conference. The "meeting of interestedcountries" convened by the Secretary-General is therefore a meeting authorized bythe General Assembly, and the Ad Hoc Working Group established by the meeting isa subsidiary organ of the United Nations. The recommendation made by the Eco-nomic and Social Council in its resolution 1969 (LIX) of 30 July 1975 concerningthe functions of the Ad Hoc Working Group is further evidence that the WorkingGroup is such an organ.

4. It follows from the foregoing that the United Nations is responsible for theexpenses of the "meeting of interested countries" and of the Ad Hoc Working Group.

5. I note that before the adoption by the General Assembly of resolution 3348(XXIX) and before the decision to establish the Ad Hoc Working Group was taken,no statement of financial implications required by rule 153 of the rules of procedureof the General Assembly had been submitted. Regrettable as this may be, it does notalter the legal status of the meetings in question as United Nations meetings.

22 August 1975

59 I.e. the meeting which the Secretary-General of the United Nations was requested toconvene under resolution XIII of the World Food Conference (see report of the WorldFood Conference (E/CONF.65/20—United Nations publication, Sales No. 75.II.A.3), p. 12),to work out the details of the International Fund for Agricultural Development.

177

19. USE OF GOVERNMENT-FINANCED PERSONNEL WITHIN THE UNITED NATIONS—ASSO-CIATE EXPERTS AND JUNIOR PROFESSIONALS

Memorandum to the Deputy Director, Administrative Division,United Nations Children's Fund

From your memorandum of 30 May and our conversation, we understand thatyou were approached about UNICEF's interest in associate experts to be provided bya Member State under a proposed "memorandum of understanding", and that youreplied that UNICEF employed "junior professionals" but not associate experts.

We think it is necessary to take account of the historic and functional differencesbetween these two categories of government-financed personnel. As for the associateexperts, the Member State which approached you was one of the originators of the"volunteer" arrangement which was set forth in Economic and Social Council resolu-tion 849 (XXXII) of 4 August 1961; that resolution was entitled "Use of volunteerworkers in the operational programmes of the United Nations and related agenciesdesigned to assist in the economic and social development of the less developed coun-tries". (As you can see from the title and text of the resolution, the term "volunteer"was used to describe personnel provided at no cost to the United Nations; operationalpersonnel so provided under the resolution are now called "associate experts".)

The resolution sets forth the principles which shall govern the use of these"volunteer technical personnel" and provides that these principles should apply totheir assignment to programmes and projects carried out by the United Nations withfunds provided by the Expanded Programme of Technical Assistance, the SpecialFund and other voluntary funds of the United Nations (including UNICEF).

The associate experts programme (now used by the United Nations and special-ized agencies) involves (1) an agreement with the government providing the expertsand, (2) special letters of appointment. (The associate experts, although staff membersand project personnel, have letters of appointment which contain all the terms of theirappointment with no reference to the 200 Series of the Staff Rules.)

In recent years, the Member State concerned has proposed changes in theassociate expert programme which were discussed among the agencies who executethe various technical assistance programmes and who use technical assistance expertsand associate experts. One difficulty was a proposed provision for periodic reports tothe government on the performance of experts which was not acceptable to the UnitedNations;60 the said Member State has not concluded any new associate experts agree-ment with the United Nations, although it remains the supplier of numerous highlyqualified associate experts to United Nations technical assistance projects under whatseems to be mutually satisfactory conditions.

The junior professional officer arrangement is different because junior profes-sionals are not "operational" or "project personnel". Obviously there are policyreasons for limiting the number, length of service and types of posts for this kindof government-provided staff who work not on projects in countries receiving assistancebut in regional offices for the UNDP or UNICEF Secretariat. Project personnelgenerally are different from professional staff as regards geographical distribution,career expectations, role with respect to United Nations administration, recipient gov-ernment approval, etc. The policy objection to governments subsidizing their ownnationals in United Nations service is generally less relevant to project personnelthan to other staff.

«o See Juridical Yearbook, 1973, p. 169.

178

Within the United Nations, only UNICEF and UNDP employ government-financed "junior professionals". They were used first by UNDP, which does not ofcourse employ staff members to execute projects and hence employs no technicalassistance experts, but did wish to accept a Member Government's offer of "volun-teers" to serve only at the junior professional, i.e. P.1/P.2, level and in non-establishedposts in resident representatives' offices. These "junior professionals" are paid fromfunds-in-trust pursuant to an agreement with the Government and are appointed underthe usual United Nations fixed-term letters of appointment. UNICEF, as you know,followed suit and has concluded agreements in this field with two Member States.

13 June 1975

20. QUESTION WHETHER LOCALLY RECRUITED PERSONNEL EMPLOYED IN CONNEXIONWITH A SPECIFIC UNDP PROJECT ARE UNITED NATIONS STAFF MEMBERS

Memorandum to the Deputy Director, Support Services Branch,Office of Technical Co-operation

1. This is in reply to your memorandum of 14 April 1975 on the above subject.2. It appears from the documentation which was provided to this Office that

the Government of a Member State has undertaken to contribute in cash to theproject "In-Service Training Programme for Regional Development" a certain amountof convertible currency and a certain amount of local currency and that part of theamount in local currency is to be utilized to defray the cost o.E the services of locallyrecruited Professional Counterpart and Support Personnel Cash Counterpart.

3. The relevant Project Document provides as follows with regard to suchcounterpart personnel:

"The personnel recruited under the provisions of this paragraph will berecruited by the Project, after mutual consultation between the Project Manager,the Project Director and the Project Co-ordinator. The contracts will be signedby the Project Manager and it is emphasized that personnel hired locally underthe provisions of this paragraph will not be United Nations staff members."

The basic legal question presented by these provisions is wb.ei.her the statement thatthe persons referred to "will not be United Nations staff members" is legally valid.

4. It may be helpful to define at this point the concepts of employer andemployee. The relationship of employer-employee arises out of a contract, express orimplied, between a person (the employee) who renders services to another for asalary, and who, in the performance of such services, is subject to the direction andcontrol of that other person (the employer).

5. It follows from this definition of the employer-employee relationship that aproject cannot be an employer. This is because a project is an activity and, mani-festly, an activity does not have the legal capacity to enter into a contract or to performany other juridical act. Only a real person or a legal person such as a corporationcan possess the requisite legal capacity to perform a juridical act. Where a projectprovides assistance to an institute, centre or other body, such institute, centre orother body, if it possesses the requisite legal capacity under the applicable body oflaw, may be the employer of project personnel. Such institute, centre or other body,however, is not the project, but rather the recipient of assistance to the project. Inany event, as there is no institute, centre or other body directly involved in the projectunder consideration, the employer of the persons concerned can only be the UnitedNations or the Government of the Member State concerned.

179

6. As has been noted, the Project Document provides that the persons concerned"will not be United Nations staff members". In our opinion, there is a distinct pos-sibility that this provision may not conclusively settle the question for the UnitedNations, the other parties to the Project Document or the employees concerned. Ifit is the case that this provision in the Project Document rests upon the erroneouslegal conception that the Project is the employer of the persons concerned, then itmay well be that the United Nations will be held to be the employer. Moreover,unless the employee concerned manifests his assent to this provision in the ProjectDocument, expressly or by implication, it is not at all certain that it is binding uponhim, since he is not a party to that agreement.

7. The determination of the question as to who is the employer of a particularperson is to be made on the basis of the facts in each case. The relevant informationcontained in the Project Document and your memorandum of 14 April 1975 appearto be insufficient to enable the Office of Legal Affairs to express an authoritativeopinion as to whether the United Nations or the Government concerned is the employerof the locally engaged personnel whose salaries are paid from the counterpart con-tribution in cash. There appears however to be little evidence to support the viewthat the Government is the employer of the persons concerned. According to theProject Document, the Government appears to perform two functions in respect ofsuch employees: (a) it contributes the funds for the payment of their salaries, and(6) through the Project Director and Project Co-ordinator (both Government officialswhose services are provided as part of the counterpart contribution in kind), itconsults with the Project Manager on the recruitment of the persons concerned. Itappears that the provisions in the Project Document concerning consultation of theProject Manager, Project Director and Project Co-ordinator apply only in respectof personnel whose salaries are to be paid from the counterpart contribution in localcurrency. The Project Document contains no comparable provision for personnelwhose salaries are to be paid from the counterpart contribution in convertible cur-rency. In any event, it seems evident that the performance of such functions is notsufficient to make the Government the employer of the persons concerned.

8. This is particularly so because of the functions performed by the UnitedNations in respect of such persons. According to the Project Document, the ProjectManager, who is a staff member of the United Nations, signs the contracts of employ-ment. There is nothing to indicate that in the performance of such acts he is actingon behalf of or as an agent of the Government concerned. From the legal point ofview, he cannot sign on behalf of the Project, since, as has been noted, a project isan activity, and a person cannot sign a contract on behalf of or as an agent of anactivity. Further, it is the United Nations, and not the Government, who pays thesalaries of the persons concerned. In this connexion, it may be relevant to observethat the Project Document states that "the Project Manager will in consultation withthe Project Director (1) Be responsible on behalf of the United Nations for theexecution of this Project in accordance with the provided work plan".

9. In summary, it appears from the limited information available (a) that itis legally impossible for the Project to be an employer; (b) that there is virtually noevidence to establish that the Government concerned is the employer of personswhose salaries are paid from its counterpart contributions in cash—whether in localor convertible currency; and (c) there is strong evidence to support the view that itis the United Nations who is the employer of such persons.

2 May 1975

180

21. POLICY OF THE ORGANIZATION WITH RESPECT TO THE ACCEPTANCE OF THESERVICES OF GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS OR EXPERTS ON A NON-REIMBURSEMENTLOAN BASIS—STATUS OF OFFICIALS OR EXPERTS ENGAGED ON SUCH BASIS

Memorandum to the Controller, Assistant Secretary-General,Office of Financial Services

1. This is in reply to your memorandum of 12 June 1975 requesting our viewsregarding the policy which should be followed by the Organization with respect tothe acceptance of the services of government officials or experts on a non-reimbursablebasis.

2. The Organization's policy regarding the acceptance of services on reim-bursable and non-reimbursable loan has been laid down by the Office of Personnelin a document entitled "TARS procedures," dated 13 January 1972.

3. The provisions of that document which appear relevant to the matter underconsideration may be briefly summarized as follows. An expert who is a governmentemployee and is to be loaned to the Organization on a non-reimbursable basis maybe engaged by the Organization under a Special Service Agreement (Section 6.1.3,p. 3, para. 19). The expert engaged under such an Agreement has the legal statusof an independent contractor, is not a staff member of the Organization, and is notsubject to the United Nations Staff Rules (ibid., p. 8, para. 23). He is an expert onmission within the meaning of the Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of theUnited Nations,61 and, as such, is entitled to the privileges and immunities providedfor in Article VI of that Convention (ibid., pp. 7 and 8, paras. 19 and 24).

4. We see no objection from the legal point of view to the policy or procedureslaid down by the Office of Personnel with regard to reimbursable and non-reimbursableloans. The prohibition in the Charter against seeking or receiving instructions fromany government or from any other authority external to the Organization appliesonly to the Secretary-General and to the staff. It has no applicability to a personhaving the status of an independent contractor since, by definition, such a person isnot an employee or staff member of the Organization.

5. Similarly, there appears to be no impediment under the Financial Regulationsto TARS policy and procedures, as set forth above. Under Regulation 7.2, voluntary

contributions whether in cash or in kind may be accepted provided that the purposesfor which the contributions are made are consistent with the policies, aims andactivities of the Organization. In our opinion, the acceptance by the Organization ofa proposed contribution by a government of services by its employees or by theemployees of a private firm does not in and of itself violate the terms of the saidRegulation.

20 June 1975

22. ISSUANCE OF LAISSEZ-PASSERS TO OFFICIALS OF THE WORLD INTELLECTUAL PROP-ERTY ORGANIZATION—SPECIAL ARRANGEMENTS TO TAKE EFFECT AFTER THECONVENTION ON THE PRIVILEGES AND IMMUNITIES OF THE SPECIALIZED AGENCIESENTERS INTO FORCE IN RESPECT OF WIPO—PROVISIONAL ISSUANCE OF LAISSEZ-PASSERS FOR THE INTERIM PERIOD

Letter to the Legal Counsel of the World Intellectual Property Organization

This is in reply to your letter dated 12 June 1975, in which you referred to thequestion whether the laissez-passers to be issued to officials of the World Intellectual


181

Property Organization under the proposed special arrangements62 should be giveneffect pursuant to the Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the UnitedNations63 or the Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of Specialized Agen-cies,64 or possibly both Conventions.

The delay in preparing the present answer to the letter was caused in part byabsence from Headquarters and also by the need to search the Secretariat's files inorder to provide you with information you requested concerning the practice followedduring the so-called hiatus period which you defined as the period between 21 No-vember 1947, when the General Assembly approved the Specialized Agencies Con-vention with its draft annexes, and the respective dates of entry into force of thatConvention in respect of the various specialized agencies.

From this research it appears that from 1947 United Nations laissez-passerswere issued to officials of specialized agencies with whom agreement had been reachedconcerning the issuance of laissez-passer. The laissez-passer carried a statement to theeffect that the laissez-passer was issued to a member of a specialized agency inaccordance with section 28 of the Convention on the Privileges and Immunities ofthe United Nations. In 1948 the Economic and Social Council in its resolution 136(VI) requested the Secretary-General to make arrangements to issue laissez-passersto officials of specialized agencies and pursuant to this request on 17 March 1948,the Secretary-General sent a circular letter to Member States informing them of theconditions under which laissez-passers were issued. In the course of 1949, agreementswere entered into between the United Nations and the Specialized Agencies settingout Standard Terms for the issuance of laissez-passers on a regular basis. The StandardTerms superseded the provisional arrangements entered into in accordance withresolution 136 (VI) of the Economic and Social Council. Circular letters were sentby the Secretary-General in May and June 1949 to Member States informing themof the transition from the provisional arrangements to the Standard Terms. It appearsthat the procedure just referred to was followed until late 1956 or early 1957 atwhich time the Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the SpecializedAgencies had been widely accepted by Member States and it therefore was felt thatit was undesirable to have laissez-passers in circulation which referred to UnitedNations officials and to the Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the UnitedNations, when in fact they were issued to officials of a specialized agency and thecorrect reference should be to the Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of theSpecialized Agencies.

Although it may be said in retrospect that the laissez-passer issued before 1957to officials of the specialized agencies should not have referred to the Convention onthe Privileges and Immunities of the United Nations—except for a reference to

62 Under Article 17 of the Agreement between the United Nations and the World Intel-lectual Property Organization (approved by the General Assembly of WIPO on 27 September1974 and by the General Assembly of the United Nations on 17 December 1974 [see GeneralAssembly resolution 3346 (XXIX)]), which recognized WIPO as a specialized agencybrought into relationship with the United Nations in accordance with Articles 57 and 63of the Charter,

"Officials of the Organization shall be entitled, in accordance with such specialarrangements as may be concluded between the Secretary-General of the United Nationsand the Director-General of the Organization, to use the laissez-passer of the UnitedNations."

The relationship agreement between the United Nations and WIPO came into force on 17December 1974.

«3 United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 1, p. 15.«4 Ibid., vol. 33, p. 261.

182

section 28 as containing the authority for the Secretary-General to issue the laissez-passers—it is relevant to emphasize that the laissez-passer does not in itself conveyprivileges or immunities to the bearer. The full effect of the laissez-passers is thatthey "shall be recognized as valid travel documents" by the authorities of MemberStates.

Turning now to the situation with which we are presently seized, I would like tosay that from our side the proposed special arrangements on the issuance of laissez-passers to officials of the World Intellectual Property Organization were intendedonly for the situation after the entry into force of the Specialized Agencies Conventionin respect of the World Intellectual Property Organization.65 On this assumption wefeel that it would be sufficient to refer in the arrangements only to section 26 of theConvention on the Privileges and Immunities of the Specialized Agencies as containingthe legal basis for the issuance and not to any provisions of the United NationsConvention.66

Concerning the provisional issuance of laissez-passers pending entry into forceof the Specialized Agencies Convention in respect of the World Intellectual PropertyOrganization as well as the conclusion of the special arrangements just referred to,the Secretariat has agreed that this may be done on the basis of section 28 of theConvention on the Privileges and Immunities of the United Nations. It is our under-standing that the World Intellectual Property Organization desired to provide itsofficials with a travel document which could be issued without delay. It cannot beassumed, however, that officials of the World Intellectual Property Organization willenjoy the protection of the Specialized Agencies Convention in the interim perioduntil that Convention has entered into force in respect of WIPO.

3 October 1975

23. PRIVILEGES AND IMMUNITIES OF MEMBERS OF THE STAFF OF THE UNITEDNATIONS—MEANING OF THE TERM "OFFICIALS OF THE UNITED NATIONS" FORTHE PURPOSE OF APPLICATION OF THE CONVENTION ON THE PRIVILEGES ANDIMMUNITIES OF THE UNITED NATIONS

Memorandum to the Chief, Centres Administrative Unit, Field Operations Service

1. I refer to your memorandum of 18 August 1975 which raises the questionof the privileges and immunities of local staff members of the United Nations Infor-mation Centre in [name of a Member State].

2. The General Assembly, in resolution 76 (I) of 7 December 1946, defined thecategories of "officials of the United Nations" to which the relevant provisions ofthe Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the United Nations were to apply;namely, it approved "the granting of the privileges and immunities referred to in

65 Under section 37, the Convention will become applicable to WIPO when it hastransmitted to the Secretary-General of the United Nations the final text of the annex relatingto it and has informed him that it accepts the standard clauses, as modified by this annex,and undertaken to give effect to specified sections and any provisions of the annex placingobligations on WIPO. Under section 44, the Convention shall enter into force for each Stateparty in respect of WIPO when it has become applicable to it in accordance with section 37and the State party has undertaken to apply the provisions of the Convention to WIPO inaccordance with section 43.

66 The arrangements which have been agreed upon by an exchange of letters dated 1and 15 March 1976 between the United Nations and WIPO and which are to come into forceon the date when the Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the Specialized Agenciesbecomes applicable to WIPO refer to article VIII (sections 26-30) of the Convention on thePrivileges and Immunities of the Specialized Agencies.

183

articles V and VII of the Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the UnitedNations . . . to all members of the staff of the United Nations, with the exception ofthose who are recruited locally and are assigned to hourly rates." (Italics added.)

It will be noted that in this definition of the term "officials of the United Nations"(which, as indicated above, the General Assembly adopted for the purpose of applicationof the Convention), no distinction is made among staff members of the United Nationsas to nationality or residence.

3. The categories established in resolution 76 (I) have remained unchangedand the Secretary-General has accordingly maintained that the determination made bythe General Assembly in that resolution precludes any distinction being drawn (e.g.on grounds of nationality or residence) so as to exclude a given category of stafffrom the benefit of the privileges and immunities referred to in articles V and VII ofthe Convention, except in the case of locally recruited staff employed at hourly rates.

4. It follows from the position, as stated above, of the General Assembly andthe Secretary-General that there is in our view no legal objection to the printed textappearing on the United Nations identity card for the Information Centre staff,67 itbeing understood that that card may not be issued to locally recruited staff employedat hourly rates. It is to be noted in this connexion that the Member State concernedacceded to the Convention without any reservation and thus undertook to accordthe privileges and immunities provided for therein in accordance with the provisionsof General Assembly resolution 76 (I).

Should nevertheless the Government object to the said text, it may be pointedout, inter alia, that the immunity of United Nations officials from legal process (section18 (a)) is limited to official acts and that in any case where, in the Secretary-General'sopinion, maintaining the immunity of an official would impede the course of justiceand it can be waived without prejudice to the interests of the United Nations, theSecretary-General would have the right and the duty to waive the immunity. It goeswithout saying that the Secretary-General would always very carefully examine thefacts in any case where the possibility of a waiver of immunity may be raised. In thisconnexion it may be advisable, when issuing identity cards to the staff members con-cerned, to draw their attention to the provisions of sections 20 and 21 of the Convention.

23 September 1975

24. CONVENTION ON THE PRIVILEGES AND IMMUNITIES OF THE UNITED NATIONSAND CONVENTION ON THE PRIVILEGES AND IMMUNITIES OF THE SPECIALIZEDAGENCIES—QUESTION WHETHER UNDER THOSE CONVENTIONS A HOST STATE isREQUIRED TO EXTEND FULL DIPLOMATIC PRIVILEGES TO HIGH OFFICIALS OF THEORGANIZATION CONCERNED WHO ARE ITS NATIONALS OR PERMANENT RESIDENTS

Letter to the Adviser for International Organizations Affairs,International Labour Office

This is further to your letter of 28 January 1975 in which you refer to "TheSpecialized Agencies of the United Nations (Immunities and Privileges) Order 1974"and "The United Nations and International Court of Justice (Immunities and Privileges)Order 1974" of the United Kingdom (Statutory Instruments 1974 Nos. 1260 and1261).68 You have mentioned article 15, paragraph 2 of the two Orders, which deny

67 Reading as follows:"Mr. ... whose photograph and signature appear on the opposite page hereof is

an official of the United Nations and as such enjoys the protection of the UN Conventionon Privileges and Immunities duly enacted as law in [name of the Member State con-cerned and references to the relevant Act]."68 Reproduced in the Juridical Yearbook, 1974, pp. 7 and 11.

184

the diplomatic privileges provided for high officials in section 21 of the Convention onthe Privileges and Immunities of the Specialized Agencies and section 19 Conventionon the Privileges and Immunities of the United Nations to "any person who is acitizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies or a permanent resident of the UnitedKingdom". You have asked for the matter to be considered at the forthcoming sessionof the Preparatory Committee of the Administrative Committee on Co-ordination.

In the first place, I would like to stress that the privileges granted by sections 19and 20 of the Specialized Agencies Convention, like those under section 18 of theUnited Nations Convention, are and must be enjoyed by all officials, regardless ofnationality. Section 21 and section 19 of the respective conventions, however, referto "the privileges and immunities exemptions and facilities accorded to diplomaticenvoys, in accordance with international law", and two interpretations of that phraseseem to be possible.

In the ordinary diplomatic context, States are not required to extend full diplomaticprivileges to persons who are their nationals or permanent residents, even if they haveconsented to receive such persons in a diplomatic capacity. Article 38 of the ViennaConvention on Diplomatic Relations69 (1961) provides in paragraph 1:

"Except in so far as additional privileges and immunities may be grantedby the receiving State, a diplomatic agent who is a national of or permanentlyresident in that State shall enjoy only immunity from jurisdiction, and inviolability,in respect of official acts performed in the exercise of his functions."

Similar provisions are made in article 71 of the Vienna Convention on ConsularRelations (1963)™ and article 40 of the Convention on Special Missions (1969).71

Substantially the same wording is used in the draft articles on the representation ofStates in their relations within international organizations, prepared by the InternationalLaw Commission in 197172 and now being considered by a United Nations Conferenceof plenipotentiaries in Vienna.73 Article 37, paragraph 1 of that draft states that

"Except in so far as additional privileges and immunities may be grantedby the host State, the head of mission and any member of the diplomatic staff ofthe mission [to an international organization] who are nationals of or permanentlyresident in that State shall enjoy only immunity from jurisdiction and inviolabilityin respect of official acts performed in the exercise of their functions."

Article 68 makes the same provision in respect of delegations to organs and conferences,and article V of the Annex to the draft (relating to observers) repeats it yet again.74

Those articles have not yet been discussed by the current Vienna Conference,which will end only on 14 March 1975. If, however, provisions like those in theCommissions's draft articles are adopted, it will appear that the States participatingdo not consider that international law requires a host State to accord full diplomaticprivileges to diplomatic envoys accredited to an international organization who arenationals of or permanently resident in that State. If that view is taken, sections 21 and19 of the respective Conventions on Privileges and Immunities would tend to beinterpreted in the same way in regard to high officials. As a practical matter, it does

69 United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 500, p. 95.™Ibid., vol. 596, p. 261; See also Juridical Yearbook, 1963, p. 109.7* General Assembly resolution 2530 (XXIV). See also Juridical Yearbook, 1969, p. 125.72 Official Records of the General Assembly, Twenty-sixth Session, Supplement No. 10

(A/8410/Rev.l), Chapter II.73 For the text of the relevant Convention and in particular of its article 37 as adopted

by the Conference, see p. 87 of this Yearbook.74 In the final text of the Convention, the relevant provisions are to be found in arti-

cle 67 and 72 respectively.

185

not seem that arguments to the effect that high officials of organizations ought to betreated more favourably than diplomatic envoys sent to those organizations wouldmeet with much support.

On occasion in the past, the United Nations Secretariat, without success, has takena position against discrimination on grounds of nationality in the application of section19 of its Convention. After the United States became a party to that Convention,the question arose as to the privileges to be accorded to high officials of United Statesnationality. In May 1971 the United States informed us that it would not extenddiplomatic privileges to them. We replied, requesting the Department of State tochange its position, and arguing:

(i) that the plain meaning of "all Assistant Secretaries-General" was obvious;and that "in accordance with international law" referred only to the scope of theprivileges to be accorded rather than to the persons entitled to them;

(ii) that the original draft of the Convention prepared by the PreparatoryCommission had contained a limitation that high officials could not invoke immunityas regards matters not connected with their official duties before courts of their countryof nationality, but that this limitation had been rejected by the General Assembly atits first session;

(iii) that section 15 of the United Nations Convention expressly provided thatimmunities were not applicable as between a representative and the State of whichhe was a national or which he represented, while there was no such express limitationin the case of high officials; and

(iv) that the status of "international officials" provided in the Charter implied aprohibition of discrimination among them on grounds of nationality.

The United States, however, upon reconsideration maintained its position and didnot accept our arguments. We have not pursued the matter further, nor has theSecretariat protested the new United Kingdom Order relating to the United Nations.

You have referred to the Italian instrument of accession to the Convention onthe Privileges and Immunities of the Specialized Agencies, which was transmitted to usin 1952 but has not been registered owing to objections. That instrument containedtwo reservations, of which the second related to the immunities of high officials undersection 21, but the first and more important related to the immunities of the organi-zations themselves under section 4. Both reservations were objected to, and thus, evenif it comes to seem futile to insist on the diplomatic immunities of high officials intheir own countries, no change of attitude is necessary in respect of the instrument ofaccession as a whole.

I shall of course be glad to provide any further information that the PreparatoryCommittee may desire.

25 February 1975

25. QUESTION OF THE FINANCIAL RESPONSIBILITY TO THE ORGANIZATION OF MEMBERSOF THE STAFF FOR ACCIDENTAL DAMAGE CAUSED TO UNITED NATIONS VEHICLESWHILE DRIVING SUCH VEHICLES—POLICY OF THE ORGANIZATION IN THIS RESPECT

Memorandum prepared for the Secretary of the Property Survey Board15

at the United Nations Office in Geneva

1. The responsibility of a United Nations staff member for accidental damageto United Nations vehicles and, as the case may be, the amount for which he should be

75 The Property Survey Board is a Secretariat board whose function is to advise theDirector of General Services and the Controller on losses of United Nations property anddisposal of surplus property.

186

considered financially responsible towards the Organization, are determined in the lightof a legal opinion contained in a memorandum dated 17 October 1969, from theLegal Counsel to the Chairman of the Headquarters Property Survey Board, com-menting on a draft text that attempted to establish assessment policy guide-lines. Thedraft was never finalized, but paragraphs 3-9 of the Legal Counsel's memorandum(which comment on Section VII of the draft) are very relevant to the subject inquestion. They read as follows: __

"Section VII

"3. Section VII of the draft would, as we understand it, make a driver ofa United Nations vehicle financially accountable, subject to certain limitations,for damage caused to the vehicle if it is damaged (a) while being used on officialbusiness as a result of gross negligence on the part of the driver, (6) while beingused on official business as a result of negligence, but not gross negligence, onthe part of the driver, and (c) while being used for a recreational purpose (apermissible use in certain missions) as a result of negligence, whether gross ornot, on the part of the driver.

"4. A case of gross negligence in our opinion would be one involving anelement of recklessness such as driving a vehicle at an obviously excessive speedor while intoxicated or in obvious breach of the rules of the road.

"5. To require a driver to be financially accountable in cases of the typereferred to in (a) and (c) above would not appear to be unreasonable. It doesnot seem reasonable to us, however, that a United Nations driver should bemade financially accountable in the type of case referred to in (6). It is usual forowners of vehicles to insure themselves against, among other risks, the risk ofdamage to their vehicles as a result of negligence on Ihe part of the driver,whether the driver be the owner himself or someone driving on his behalf. Anowner may of course find it more economical to be self-insured, namely, not topurchase insurance (and have an insurer bear the risk of damage) but to bearthe risk himself. As you are aware, such is the case with the United Nations,which has decided that it is less expensive to be self-insured with respect todamage to its vehicles than to purchase insurance. In these circumstances it seemsto us to be only equitable, if a United Nations vehicle is damaged while drivenon official business in circumstances involving negligence but not gross negligenceon its driver's part, that the Organization should meet resulting costs and notrequire the driver to bear such costs totally or in part.

"6. There is a further consideration which should also be taken into accountin this connexion, namely, that if in such cases United Nations drivers are requiredto bear resulting costs even partially, they would in the performance of theirduties be subject to a degree of financial risk to which other staff members arenot exposed.

"7. We would not consider the imposition of a financial penalty in suchcases as justifiable on the ground that the penalty may act as a deterrent againstcareless driving. In terms of Section III of the draft statement, in the event of anaccident involving negligence on the part of a United Nations driver, the driverloses his entitlement to a safe driver's bonus for the car in question. He wouldalso be open to administrative censure and perhaps to other non-financial adminis-trative penalties as well. ... It seems to us that these are in themselves significantdeterrents. To impose an additional deterrent by way of a financial penalty seemsto us to be excessive in cases where gross negligence is not found. If an additionaldeterrent is felt to be desirable, it should not in our opinion take the form of afinancial penalty in view of the inconsistency that would exist between such a

187

financial penalty and the Organization's policy of self-insurance with respect todamage to its vehicles.

"8. It is our understanding that there are occasions in mission areas wherestaff members who are not full-time drivers find it necessary to drive themselveson official United Nations business. The imposition of a financial penalty onsuch staff members in cases not involving gross negligence on their part wouldseem to us to be even more unjustifiable than in cases involving full-time drivers.

"9. We would recommend for these reasons that the financial penaltyproposed in Section VII of the draft statement not be applied in the type of casewe have referred to in category (b) in paragraph 3 above; and that the provisionsof Section VII of the draft statement be amended accordingly."2. I would like to add, by way of clarification in relation to paragraph 9 of the

memorandum, that determination of a staff member's financial responsibility for lossesto the Organization should in no case be considered a "financial penalty". The assess-ments or "surcharges" as the Board may recommend under Financial Rule 110.15(Z>)7 6 are in the character of a recuperation of at least part of the losses incurred. Oneshould therefore keep always in mind that these surcharges are not to be equated withthe disciplinary measures provided for in chapter X of the Staff Rules.

6 October 1975

26. IMMUNITY OF STAFF MEMBERS AND THEIR IMMEDIATE FAMILIES FROM IMMIGRATIONRESTRICTIONS AND FROM EXCLUSION AND DEPORTATION PROCEEDINGS UNDER THECONVENTION ON THE PRIVILEGES AND IMMUNITIES OF THE UNITED NATIONS,THE HEADQUARTERS AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE UNITED NATIONS AND THEUNITED STATES AND THE IMMIGRATION LAW OF THE UNITED STATES

Internal memorandum

1. This opinion deals with the visa status of two nationals of a Member Statewho were locally recruited and who both serve in the General Service category atHeadquarters. Both hold probationary appointments. One entered the United Stateson a business visa (B-l) and the other entered the United States under a treaty-tradervisa (E-l). Both currently hold G-4 visas, which were applied for by the UnitedNations on their behalf and which were summarily granted. Some time after the com-mencement of their appointments and the granting of their G-4 visas, both staffmembers applied under the appropriate staff rules and regulations to have membersof their family join them and requested through the United Nations that those familymembers be granted G-4 visas. . . .

2. Under both the provisions of the Convention on the Privileges and Immunitiesof the United Nations77 (hereafter referred to as the "Convention") and the Head-quarters Agreement between the United Nations and the United States78 (hereafterreferred to as the "Headquarters Agreement"), immunity is granted to officials of the

76 Financial Rule 110.15 reads as follows:''''Writing-off losses of property

"(fl) The Controller may, after full investigation in each case, authorize thewriting-off of losses of United Nations property or such other adjustments of the recordsas will bring the balance shown by the record into conformity with the actual quanti-ties.

"(6) Final determination as to all surcharges to be made against staff membersor others as the result of losses will be made by the Controller."77 United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 1, p. 15.7« Ibid., vol. 11, p. 12.

188

United Nations in matters relating to immigration restriction and alien registration.Article V, section 18, of the Convention in part states:

"Officials of the United Nations shall:«

"(d) Be immune, together with their spouses and relatives dependent onthem, from immigration restrictions and alien registration; . . ."

Article IV, section 11 of the Headquarters Agreement states in its relevant part:

"The federal, state or local authorities of the United States shall not imposeany impediments to transit to or from the headquarters district of: (1) represen-tatives of Members or officials of the United Nations, . . . or the families ofsuch representatives or officials."

Furthermore, article IV, section 13, states in part:

"(a) Laws and regulations in force in the United States regarding theentry of aliens shall not be applied in such manner as to interferewith the privileges referred to in Section 11. When visas are requiredfor persons referred to in that section, they shall be granted withoutcharge and as promptly as possible."

Sub-paragraph (b) (1) of section 13 further states that:

"No proceedings shall be instituted under such laws or regulations to requireany such person to leave the United States except with the prior approval ofthe Secretary of State of the United States. Such approval shall be given onlyafter consultation with the appropriate Member, in the case of a representativeof a Member (or a member of his family), or with the Secretary-General....in the case of any other person referred to in Section 11."

Under the Convention, the immunities granted to United Nations officials maybe waived by the Secretary-General. Article V, section 20, states in relevant part:

"The Secretary-General shall have the right and the duty to waive theimmunity of any official in any case where, in his opinion, the immunity wouldimpede the course of justice and can be waived without prejudice to the interestsof the United Nations . . ."On the other hand, where a dispute arises in which the Secretary-General is not

disposed to waive the immunity of staff members and in which the United Nationsseeks an enforcement of the status granted such officials, it may resort to the disputesettlement provision of the Headquarters Agreement embodied in article VIII, section21 ( a ) , reading as follows:

"Any dispute between the United Nations and the United States concerningthe interpretation or application of this agreement or any other supplementalagreement, which is not settled by negotiation or other agreed mode of settlement,shall be referred for final decision to a tribunal of three arbitrators, one to benamed by the Secretary-General, one to be named by the Secretary of Stateof the United States, and the third to be chosen by the two, or, if they shouldfail to agree upon a third, then by the President of the International Court ofJustice."

3. In addition to the Convention and Headquarters Agreement, United Nationsofficials are also given immunity from certain visa restrictions under Title 8 of theUnited States Code, which embodies the United States law regarding aliens andnationality; section 1102 provides that, as long as they continue in the nonimmigrantclasses enumerated in that section,

189

"ineligibility to receive visas and exclusion or deportation of aliens shall not beconstrued to apply to non-immigrants . . . (3) within the classes described inparagraphs ... (15) (G) (iv) of section 1101 (a) of this title, except for thoseprovisions relating to reasonable requirements of passports and visas as a meansof identification and documentation necessary to establish their qualificationsunder such paragraphs . . .".Section 1101 (a) (15) (G) (iv) in turn states that nonimmigrant aliens include

"officers or employees of such international organizations, and the members of theirimmediate families". Therefore, it appears that under United States immigration law,neither section 1226 relating to the procedure for the exclusion of aliens, nor section1251 relating to procedures for deportation of aliens may be applied to either staffmembers or their families where such individuals fall within the definition of section1101 (a) (15) (G) (iv) and the protection afforded under section 1102 (3).

4. It is clear under the Convention, the Headquarters Agreement and the UnitedStates immigration law that (1) staff members holding G-4 visas and subject to therelevant provisions of immunity cannot be subjected to exclusion or deportation pro-ceedings, and (2) the privileges and immunities granted those staff members are alsoextended to members of their families who, in turn, may not be lawfully refused G-4visas and may not be lawfully excluded from the United States.

21 October 1975

27. QUESTION WHETHER A UNITED NATIONS OFFICIAL MAY BE GRANTED SPECIALLEAVE TO COMPLETE MILITARY SERVICE IN HIS COUNTRY OF ORIGIN, IN THE LIGHTOF THE RELEVANT PROVISIONS OF THE CONVENTION ON THE PRIVILEGES ANDIMMUNITIES OF THE UNITED NATIONS AND OF APPENDIX C OF THE STAFF RULES

Internal memorandum

The Office of Legal Affairs has been requested to give its opinion regarding theapplicable law relating to military service of a staff member who is a national of aMember State. The staff member has requested that he be allowed to take specialleave from the Organization to complete such service.

1. Under article V, section 18 (c), of the Convention on Privileges and Immuni-ties of the United Nations, officials of the Organization are immune from nationalservice obligations. The Member State of which the staff member concerned is anational has acceded to the Convention without declaration or reservation. The MemberState in question would, therefore, be obligated to recognize the immunity of anofficial under the terms of article V, section 18 (c). The staff member has a contractwith the Organization which qualifies him as an official under the terms of article V,section 17, of the Convention.

2. Under section (c) of Appendix C of the Staff Rules, a staff member who hascompleted one year of satisfactory probationary service or who holds a permanentor regular appointment may, if called by a Member Government for military service,be granted special leave without pay by the Organization for the duration of thatservice. This is true even though section (a) of Appendix C recognizes that staffmembers who are nationals of those Member States having acceded to the Conventionon the Privileges and Immunities of the United Nations are immune from such service.Section (1) of Appendix C furthermore states that the Secretary-General may applythe provisions of that Appendix where a staff member volunteers for military serviceor requests a waiver of his immunity under article V, section 18 (c) of the Convention.

3. The Secretary-General, therefore, has discretionary authority to grant specialleave in the case of the staff member in question, even though the staff member is

190

exempt from national service obligation. The staff member may not waive his ownimmunity. Such immunity may be waived only by the Secretary-General in conformitywith article V, section 20, of the Convention.

24 December 1975

28. EXEMPTION FROM TAXATION OF SALARIES AND EMOLUMENTS OF UNITED NATIONSOFFICIALS BY VIRTUE OF RELEVANT PROVISIONS OF THE CONVENTION ON THEPRIVILEGES AND IMMUNITIES OF THE UNITED NATIONS AND APPLICABLE GENERALASSEMBLY RESOLUTIONS WITH PARTICULAR REFERENCE TO THE POSITION OFMEMBERS OF THE SECRETARIAT AT UNITED NATIONS HEADQUARTERS IN NEW YORK

Letter to a member of a Permanent Missionto the United Nations

I am instructed to reply to your letter dated 3 February 1975 concerning theexemption from taxation to which officials of the United Nations stationed in NewYork are entitled.

The tax status of United Nations staff members is governed by the Conventionon the Privileges and Immunities of the United Nations, adopted by the GêneraiAssembly on 13 February 1946. Article V, section 18, of the Convention provides,inter alia, as follows:

"Section 18. Officials of the United Nations shall:«c

"(ft) Be exempt from taxation on the salaries and emoluments paid tothem by the United Nations."

Article V, section 17, of the Convention specifies the categories of officials towhich article V shall apply. It reads as follows:

"Section 17. The Secretary-General will specify the categories of officialsto which the provisions of this Article and Article VII shall apply. He shall sub-mit these categories to the General Assembly. Thereafter these categories shallbe communicated to the Governments of all Members. The names of the officialsincluded in these categories shall from time to time be made known to the Gov-ernments of Members."

On 7 December 1946, the General Assembly adopted resolution 76 (I), entitled"Privileges and Immunities of the Staff of the Secretariat of the United Nations".In that resolution, the General Assembly approved

"the granting of the privileges and immunities referred to in Articles V and VIIof the Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the United Nations, adoptedby the General Assembly on 13 February 1946, to all members of the staff of theUnited Nations, with the exception of those who are recruited locally and areassigned to hourly rates".

The categories specified by General Assembly resolution 76 (I) have remainedunchanged.

As regards members of the staff of the United Nations Development Programmestationed in your country, it would appear that their tax status is governed by articleIX of the Standard Basic Agreement concerning Assistance concluded with UNDP.Although your country is not a party to the Convention on the Privileges and Immuni-ties of the United Nations, the relevant provisions of article V of the Convention

191

apply by virtue of article IX, paragraph 1, of the Standard Basic Agreement concerningAssistance, reading as follows:

"1. The Government shall apply to the United Nations and its organs,including the UNDP and United Nations subsidiary organs acting as UNDPExecuting Agencies, their property, funds and assets, and to their officials, includingthe resident representative and other members of the UNDP mission in thecountry, the provisions of the Convention on the Privileges and Immunities ofthe United Nations."79

In accordance with section 18 (b) of the Convention on the Privileges andImmunities of the United Nations, all members of the United Nations Secretariatstationed at Headquarters in New York, with the exception of those who are recruitedlocally and are assigned to hourly rates, are exempt from taxation on the salariesand emoluments paid to them by the United Nations. The only exception at Head-quarters results from the special situation in which officials of the United Nationswho are nationals or permanent residents of the United States of America findthemselves. When acceding to the Convention on the Privileges and Immunities ofthe United Nations on 29 April 1970, the United States Government reserved itsposition with respect to section 18 (6) in the case of nationals and permanent residentsof the United States. Those officials therefore continued to be subject to the tax leviedby the United States authorities on the salaries and emoluments paid to them bythe United Nations. In establishing the Tax Equalization Fund (resolutions 973 (X)and 1099 (XI)), the General Assembly did all that could be done in practice toremedy the inequality which would otherwise have existed between officials who aresubject to taxation and those who are exempt, and between the United States and theother Member States. Under this arrangement, United Nations officials at all levelsare subject to assessment by the Organization in lieu of payment of national taxes,the total amount of the assessment being credited to the Member States; taxes paid bynationals and permanent residents of the United States are refunded to them andthe refunds are charged against the sums standing to the credit of the United Statesin the Tax Equalization Fund.

12 May 1975

29. POLICY OF THE UNITED NATIONS REGARDING REQUESTS FROM GOVERNMENTALAUTHORITIES FOR TESTIMONY OF STAFF MEMBERS NOT HAVING DIPLOMATICSTATUS

Cable prepared for the Liaison Office of the InternationalAtomic Energy Agency at United Nations Headquarters

The policy of the United Nations regarding responses by staff members to inquiriesfrom parliamentary bodies has not been formally articulated but is generally asfollows:

1. If testimony is sought from a staff member not having diplomatic statusvis-a-vis the authority concerned, there is immunity only concerning the workof the Organization and the staff member's duties therefor. The Organization willwaive such immunity so as not to impede normal governmental processes butonly if it deems it in its own interest to do so. In such case, it may also voluntarilyoffer testimony through an official, who may be sworn if necessary.

2. Any testimony given on the work of the Organization and the staffmember's duties, whether offered voluntarily or pursuant to a waiver by theOrganization of immunity against compelled responses, is subject to the direction

7» See Juridical Yearbook, 1973, p. 25.

192

of the Organization, that is, the Organization can instruct the staff member asto what to say and what responses to refuse.

3. If the testimony does not involve any official duties, a staff membernot having diplomatic status is not immune from compulsion to testify, and notprohibited from testifying either voluntarily or under compulsion. Such testimonyis not subject to instructions from the Organization but should be consonantwith the obligations of staff members in particular regulation 1.4 of Staff Regula-tion, reading as follows:

"Members of the Secretariat shall conduct themselves at all times ina manner befitting their status as international civil servants. They shall notengage in any activity that is incompatible with the proper discharge oftheir duties with the United Nations. They shall avoid any action and inparticular any kind of public pronouncement which may adversely reflecton their status, or on the integrity, independence and impartiality whichare required by that status. While they are not expected to give up theirnational sentiments or their political and religious convictions, they shallat all times bear in mind the reserve and tact incumbent upon them byreason of their international status."

2 December 1975

30. LEGAL VALIDITY OF THE USE BY A STAFF MEMBER OF THE UNITED NATIONS OF ANAME OTHER THAN THAT ACQUIRED AT BIRTH IN THE LIGHT OF NEW YORK LAWWHICH AS THE LAW OF THE STAFF MEMBER'S RESIDENCE IS THE APPLICABLE LAWIN THIS MATTER

Memorandum to the Director, Division of Personnel Administration,Office of Personnel Services

We have been asked to state our opinion as to the legal validity of the use byan employee of the United Nations of a name other than that acquired at birth.

1. It is our understanding that this employee has over a substantial period oftime used the name by which she prefers to be known. She originally applied for aposition with the United Nations under that name. Furthermore, she received hersecurity clearance through the United States Civil Service Commission, indicatingclearly both her name of birth and the name by which she currently holds herselfout. She holds a social security card and bank account in the name which she hasadopted. Therefore, all indications are that she is currently known by only that name.In addition, we have no indication that the adoption of that name represents fraud,is an attempt to evade creditors or in any way prejudices the rights of others. Failingsuch indication, the legal presumption should be that she has assumed that name forvalid personal reasons not intended to prejudice the rights of others.

2. The employee is a resident of the State of New York, and for purposes ofdetermining the legal validity of her change of name, the United Nations should lookto the law of her residence.

3. Under New York law, a citizen may change his name in one of two ways,either by petition to a court of competent jurisdiction under section 60 of the CivilRights Law of New York or by function of the common law of the jurisdiction. Achange of name under the common law is a right independent of any statutory rightand does not require authorization by the courts. At common law, the employee isentitled to change her name to anything she may wish by simply using the name asher own over a period of time, absent of fraud or the prejudicing of the rights of others.See Manor Homes, Inc. v. Sava, 73 Misc. 2d 660, 342 N.Y.S. 2d 291 (Civ.Ct. Queens

193

Co., 1973); Application of Middleton, 60 Misc. 2d 1056, 304 N.Y.S. 2d 145 (Civ.Ct.N.Y. Co., 1969).

4. The employee has held the name she has adopted for a substantial periodof time. There is no evidence or presumption that her change of name involves eitherfraud or prejudice to the rights of others. Therefore, at common law the name inquestion is not only a name which she uses but is legally her name as prescribed bythe law of the state of her residence.

It is therefore the opinion of this Office that the employee's name consistentwith her wishes and the law of New York State should be accepted. Of course, foradministrative purposes and for purposes of continuity of employee records alone,your office may wish to make a note in its records of her former name as well as thename she has adopted.

3 June 1975

31. REGISTRATION OF TREATIES WITH THE SECRETARIAT OF THE UNITED NATIONSUNDER ARTICLE 102 OF THE CHARTER—QUESTION WHETHER TERMINATEDTREATIES SHOULD BE REGISTERED

Note verbale to the Permanent Representative of a Member State

1. The Secretary-General of the United Nations... has the honour to acknow-ledge the receipt of the Permanent Representative's note transmitting additionaldocumentation for the purpose of registration, under Article 102 of the Charter, ofthe Trade Agreement of 7 April 1975 between the Permanent Representative's countryand [name of a Member State].

2. The above-mentioned Agreement was registered as of 17 June 1975.

3. On the same date the registration was also effected of the certified statementconcerning the termination of the Trade and Economic Agreement of 7 June 1966between the two countries, which was replaced by the Agreement of 7 April 1975.

4. Due note has been taken that the Permanent Representative's Governmentis of the view that the Understanding of 22 May 1974, which refers to the SpecialAccounts under the previous Agreement of 7 June 1966, need not be registeredbecause the corresponding funds have to date been exhausted.

In this connection, it might be pertinent to point out that neither Article 102of the Charter nor the General Assembly Regulations to give effect to Article 102exclude the registration of agreements which have been terminated, and that suchagreements have actually been registered (see for instance United Nations, TreatySeries, vol. 642, p. 246).

In addition to the general desirability of ensuring the completeness of the UnitedNations Treaty Series, there would seem to be two justifications for registering agree-ments already terminated:

(a) The first one is that an agreement, although no longer in force, may havecreated lasting legal situations, possibly leading to the invocation of thetreaty before an organ of the United Nations—an invocation which wouldbe prohibited by Article 102, paragraph 2, of the Charter, should theagreement not have been registered.

(b) The second reason is a broader one, linked to the general goal of Article102 of the Charter, namely making international agreements public; thatgoal would clearly not be achieved if registration of agreements were to

194

be waived in consideration of the latter being of a short duration or havingexpired.

Consequently, should the Permanent Representative's Government wish it to bedone, it would be quite feasible to effect registration of the Understanding of 22May 1974.

6 October 1975

32. DEPOSITARY FUNCTIONS OF THE SECRETARY-GENERAL—RULE THAT ANY ACTHAVING THE PURPOSE OF MODIFYING THE APPLICATION OF A TREATY MUST EMA-NATE FROM ONE OF THE AUTHORITIES EMPOWERED TO BIND THE STATE INTER-NATIONALLY

Note verbale to the Permanent Representative of a Member State

9. It should be emphasized that the Secretary-General, in performing hisdepositary functions in respect of multilateral treaties, considers himself bound torespect the well-established international practice whereby acts having the purposeof modifying the application of a treaty must emanate from one of the three authoritiesempowered to bind the State internationally (Head of Stal:e, Head of Government,Minister for Foreign Affairs). When, for reasons which can be very varied butusually relate to the urgency of the formality, as is very often the case particularlywhere commodity agreements are concerned, the document does not bear the signatureof one of those three authorities, the Secretary-General, while accepting deposit ofthe document, customarily requests the Government concerned to confirm the notifica-tion over the signature of one of the three authorities mentioned above.

10. This international practice is reflected in the Vienna Convention on theLaw of Treaties, which, although it has not yet entered into force, is in large measurea codification of international custom. On this point, it follows from article 7, para-graph 2, of the Convention that representatives accredited to an international organi-zation—i.e., in the present context, permanent representatives to the United Nations—are, in virtue of their functions and without having to produce full powers, consideredas representing their State solely for the purpose of adopting a treaty between thatState and the organization. This provision was reiterated and confirmed in article 12of the Vienna Convention on the Representation of States in Their Relations withInternational Organizations of a Universal Character done at Vienna on 14 March1975.80 In the case of multilateral treaties in respect of which the Secretary-Generalperforms depositary functions and thus acts on behalf of the contracting States andnot in his capacity as chief administrative officer of the United Nations, such as theCoffee Agreement, only the three traditional authorities—Head of State, Head ofGovernment and Minister for Foreign Affairs—are empowered to bind the State.

11. A recent example illustrates the soundness of this practice. The Secretary-General received for deposit a notification made by a Permanent Mission on behalfof its Government pursuant to article 1, section B (2), of the Convention relatingto the Status of Refugees of 28 July 1951 (geographical extension of obligations underthe Convention). As the notification was in the form of a note verbale from thePermanent Mission of the State concerned, the Secretary-General, while acceptingdeposit of it, requested the Permanent Mission to submit a document in good anddue form in accordance with the practice described above. In a subsequent com-munication, the Permanent Mission informed the Secretary-General that the formalities

87 Reproduced on p. 87 of this Yearbook.

195

required in order to make a notification in good and due form had not yet beencompleted and that the initial notification by the Permanent Mission should thereforebe considered withdrawn (see circular C.N. 105.1975. TREATIES-1 dated 25 April1975).

12. In conclusion, the Secretary-General considers it desirable that any instru-ment, notification or other document having the purpose of modifying the applicationof a treaty in respect of which he performs depositary functions should bear thesignature of the Minister for Foreign Affairs or, if preferred, of the Head of Stateor the Head of Government. Notifications which do not modify the legal effects of thetreaty—such as the designation of laboratories, of administrative or judicial authoritiesresponsible for the administration of certain provisions of the treaty, etc.—could,however, be made over the signature of the permanent representative of the permanentmission. This procedure seems most likely, in the present state of international law,to ensure the certainty of international commitments by eliminating any doubt asto the extent of the mutual rights and obligations of States parties; it would thereforeseem to be in the interest of all States.

17 June 1975

33. PARTICIPATION OF BELGIUM AND LUXEMBOURG IN MULTILATERAL TREATIES DE-POSITED WITH THE SECRETARY-GENERAL, IN THE LIGHT OF THEIR MEMBERSHIPIN THE BELGO-LUXEMBOURG ECONOMIC UNIONSI

Internal note

1. The question of the participation of Belgium and Luxembourg in multilateraltreaties deposited with the Secretary-General in the light of their membership in theBelgo-Luxembourg Economic Union is related to the problem of the representationof a sovereign State by another in certain fields of international treaty relations,which was briefly discussed in the Summary of the Practice of the Secretary-Generalas Depositary of Multilateral Agreements (ST/LEG/7, paras. 142 and 143).82

The Summary gives the example of Switzerland's instrument of accession to theProtocol on narcotic drugs of 11 December 1946, which specified that "the presentdeclaration of accession is also valid for the Principality of Liechtenstein" (instrumentdeposited on 25 September 1947). It gives the further example of a notification—againby Switzerland—stating, under reference to article II of the Agreement providing forthe provisional application of the Draft International Customs Conventions on Touring,on Commercial Road Vehicles and on the International Transport of Goods byRoad, dated 16 June 1949 (Agreement signed on behalf of Switzerland on 16 June1949), that the provisions of the draft conventions would also apply to the Principalityof Liechtenstein, as the Principality formed part of the Customs Territory of theSwiss Confederation (notification received by the Secretary-General on 6 December1949).

2. The question may present itself in two forms:

(a) A State acts on its own behalf and also on behalf of one or more otherStates by virtue of the powers for so acting which it possesses under anagreement concluded between that State and the other State or States—as,for example, when Belgium ratifies a multilateral treaty on its own behalf

si See also Juridical Yearbook, 1964, pp. 241-244.82 A distinction must be made between the question of the representation of one State

by another and the question of "multiple representation"—i.e., the representation of two ormore States by one delegation or one individual duly empowered by all the States represented.

196

and on behalf of Luxembourg by virtue of the relevant provisions of theConvention between Belgium and Luxembourg, for the establishment ofa Belgo-Luxembourg Economic Union;

(b) A State acts directly on behalf of an entity (an economic union, an inter-governmental organization, etc.) although the participation of the entityas such is not provided for in the agreement; in this case, the Secretary-General will treat any reference to the entity as a reference to its constituentStates (provided, of course, that the States constituting the entity arequalified individually to participate in the agreement, and the outcome isthe same as in case (a) above.83

3. It should also be noted that the question may arise at any stage in theelaboration or adoption of a multilateral treaty or during its lifetime—for example,when a conference of plenipotentiaries is being convened and it must be decided whois to be invited, or in connexion with participation in the proceedings of the con-ference (taking of decisions and voting rights), or in such matters as signature andratification.

4. The main problem, however, is to what extent the Secretary-General, asdepositary, must accept formal acts emanating from the Government of a Statewhich declares that it represents one or more other States by virtue of an agreementbetween the latter and the State in question.

6. The Secretary-General received for deposit on behalf of both the countriesconcerned Switzerland's instrument of accession to the Protocol of 11 December1946 amending various agreements on narcotic drugs, which instrument was sub-mitted as being valid also for Liechtenstein (cf. para. 1 above). It is true that theGovernment of the Netherlands and the Secretary-General of the League of Nations,the depositaries of the original agreements, had themselves accepted instrumentsissued by the Swiss Government stating that, under the terms of the arrangementsconcluded between Liechtenstein and Switzerland in 1929 and 1935 (in applicationof the Customs Union Treaty concluded on 29 March 1923), Liechtenstein wouldparticipate, so long as the said Treaty remained in force, in the international con-ventions which had been or might thereafter be concluded in the matter of narcoticdrugs, it being neither necessary nor advisable for that country to accede to themseparately. However, while Liechtenstein appears on the League of Nations list ofStates applying the agreements in question, no date of accession is given after itsname; the declaration by Switzerland was simply reproduced in a foot-note.84 Theaccession to the Protocol of 11 December 1946, notification of which was made onbehalf of Switzerland and Liechtenstein represents a new departure, in that what is

83 Usually, the Government which executes the formal act (the most frequent cases byfar are ones involving the Government of Belgium) declares that it is acting either on behalfof the entity itself or on behalf of the constituent States, without, apparently attaching anyparticular legal significance to the choice of one formula rather than the other. If the partici-pation of the entity as such is provided for by the competent forums or by the terms of theagreement, the Secretary-General will, of course, have no difficulty in accepting any formalacts pertaining to the elaboration and implementation of the multilateral treaty executed bythe State to which the treaty constituting the economic union or the organization assignedthe function of representation, provided that, where necessary, the latter treaty has beenregistered in accordance with Article 102 of the Charter.

84 See "twenty-first list" of the League of Nations, Official Journal, Special SupplementNo. 193, p. 120.

197

involved here is not simply Liechtenstein's participation in an agreement applied bySwitzerland but rather a formal accession by both countries.

7. At the United Nations Coffee Conference in 1962, Belgium was allowed toparticipate as the representative of the Belgo-Luxembourg Economic Union (in otherwords, of Belgium and Luxembourg). That decision, however, was clearly an exception,since it was not repeated the following year at the United Nations Olive Oil Con-ference. It should be noted, moreover, that the accession of Belgium and Luxembourgto the 1962 Coffee Agreement was confirmed in separate documents issued by Belgiumand Luxembourg.85

8. In the case of the 1968 Coffee Agreement, the instrument of accession issuedby the Belgian Government on its own behalf and on behalf of the LuxembourgGovernment under reference to the relevant provisions of the Belgo-LuxembourgEconomic Union Convention was accepted without Luxembourg's being required tofurnish separate powers (instrument deposited on 31 December 1969). Nor weresuch powers required of Luxembourg when the Belgian Government, in 1973, acceptedon its own behalf and on behalf of the Luxembourg Government the extension ofthe same 1968 Coffee Agreement (in view of the procedure followed for the accessionof the two countries to the 1968 Agreement itself). Similarly, the Protocol for thecontinuation in force of the International Coffee Agreement, 1968, as extended, wassigned by Belgium on behalf of Luxembourg on the strength of full powers issuedby the Belgian Government on behalf of Belgium and the Grand Duchy of Luxem-bourg pursuant to article 31 of the Consolidated Convention instituting the Belgo-Luxembourg Economic Union.

9. The 1972 Cocoa Agreement is a hybrid case. The Agreement was signedfor Belgium and Luxembourg on 1 March 1973 by a plenipotentiary appointed bythe Belgian Government, and no confirmation was required of the LuxembourgGovernment at that time. However, the notification of intention to ratify the Agree-ment made on 18 June 1973 by Belgium "on behalf of the Belgo-LuxembourgEconomic Union" was followed first by a telegram of confirmation from the Ministerfor Foreign Affairs of Luxembourg, received on 18 June 1973 and then by a noteverbale from the Permanent Representative of Luxembourg, received on 27 June1973. Finally, on 28 June 1973, the Secretariat received from the Deputy PermanentRepresentative of Belgium a notification of provisional application of the Agreement,again "on behalf of the Belgo-Luxembourg Economic Union", the notification beingdeposited on behalf of Belgium and Luxembourg.

10. Where principles are concerned, these would appear to be two vital con-siderations:

(a) Economic unions and treaties of union between two or more States are afact of international treaty relations and cannot be ignored by the Secretary-General in so far as they are an expression of State sovereignty;

(b) On the other hand, the Secretary-General, as the depositary of a multilateraltreaty, acts on behalf of the parties to the treaty. This requires him, amongother things, to ensure that the various formal acts provided for in thetreaty are performed as precisely as possible, so that there may be nodoubt in the minds of the parties as to the existence and scope of theirmutual rights and obligations.

85 Communications received by the Secretary-General on 27 July and 28 September1964, respectively; see Multilateral Treaties in respect of Which the Secretary-General Per-forms Depositary Functions (ST/LEG/SER.D/8; United Nations publication, Salas No.E.75.V.9), p. 408, foot-note 2.

198

11. It seldom happens that treaties of economic union contain clauses relatingto the conclusion of and participation in "common" treaties of such clarity as topreclude any doubt concerning their scope. To cite only the case of the Belgo-Luxembourg Economic Union, article 31, paragraph 1, of the original 1921 Con-vention (subsequently revised and "consolidated") does provide that "Treaties andagreements relating to tariffs and trade, and international payment agreementsrelating to external trade, shall be common" (see United Nations, Treaty Series, vol.547, p. 157); but article 31 also provides that treaties of that kind "shall be concludedby Belgium on behalf of the union, subject to the right of the Luxembourg Govern-ment to sign such treaties or agreements jointly with the Belgian Government", andthat "No such treaty or agreement may be concluded, modified or denounced withoutthe Luxembourg Government's having been consulted." This means that, when thedepositary accepts deposit of an instrument issued by the Belgian Government whichis presented as also binding the Luxembourg Government without requiring a docu-ment of confirmation from the latter, he is tacitly accepting that the relevant provisionsof the treaty concluded between the two countries have been complied with. Yet it isopen to question whether the depositary is qualified to make such a judgement. More-over—and although in the case of the Belgo-Luxembourg Economic Union the like-lihood of any difficulties is very remote—it seems extremely dangerous in principleto treat as binding on a Government an act for which if has not itself explicitlyaccepted responsibility. The certainty of international commitments is based largelyon the clear and direct expression of the will of Governments.

8 May 1975

34. DEPOSITARY PRACTICE OF THE SECRETARY-GENERAL REGARDING THE PARTICIPA-TION OF NEW STATES IN TREATIES APPLIED TO THEIR TERRITORY PRIOR TO INDE-PENDENCE—REQUIREMENT THAT A DECISION OF SUCCESSION BE COMMUNICATEDTO THE DEPOSITARY IN THE FORM OF A NOTIFICATION EMANATING FROM THE

HEAD OF STATE, HEAD OF GOVERNMENT OR MINISTER FOR FOREIGN AFFAIRS

Letter to the Secretary, International Narcotics Control Board

This is a reply to your letter of 8 July 1975 concerning the status of the SingleConvention on Narcotic Drugs, 1961.86

2. You mention that there seems to be a discrepancy between a publication ofthe Government of the United States, which shows Barbados, Botswana, The Gambia,Guyana, Nauru and Swaziland as being party to that Convention,87 and our annualpublication Multilateral Treaties in respect of which the Secretary-General performsdepositary functions, which does not list those States.

3. It appears from the information obtained by your office from the UnitedStates Mission at Geneva that the inclusion of the six States concerned in the above-mentioned publication is based either on "declarations of principles" communicatedby the Governments of those States to the Secretary-General, or on the provisions of"devolution agreements" concluded between the States in question and the Statepreviously responsible for their international relations, taking into account that theSingle Convention on Narcotic Drugs had been made applicable to the territory ofthe former prior to independence.

4. The listing of the six States concerned in the United States publicationseems to reflect differences in the respective depositary practices of the Secretary-

86 United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 520, p. 151.87 Treaties in force, A list of Treaties and Other Internationa! Agreements of the United

States in Force on January 1, 1975, Department of State, United States of America.

199

General and of the Government of the United States with respect to the treatmentof "declarations of principles" and provisions of a general nature regarding the positionof new States in respect of treaties applied to their territory prior to independence.

5. As you know, a decision of succession results in having the succeeding Statebecome bound, in its own name, by the treaty to which that decision applies, withexactly the same rights and obligations as if that State had ratified or acceded to, orotherwise accepted, the treaty. Consequently, it has always been the position of theSecretary-General, in his capacity as the depositary, to record a succeeding State asa party to a given treaty solely on the basis of a formal document similar to instrumentsof ratification, accession, etc., that is, a notification emanating from the Head ofState, the Head of Government or the Minister for Foreign Affairs, which shouldspecify the treaty by which the State concerned recognizes itself to be bound. Suchnotifications are deposited with the Secretary-General and the State concerned ishenceforth officially listed in the records of the treaty as a party thereto.

6. The general declarations on the basis of which five of the six States referredto above were listed in the United States publication are not sufficiently authoritative,in our view, to have the States in question listed as parties in the official records ofthe Convention. In essence, those declarations indicated that a review of the treatiesapplied to the territory of the State before accession to independence was in progressand that the State concerned would specify in due course which treaties shouldcontinue to be considered as binding and which ones should be considered as havinglapsed. Those declarations also mentioned that pending completion of the review itshould be "presumed" (sometimes, "legally presumed") that each treaty had beensuceeded to by the State concerned, and that action should be based on that presump-tion. However, such a "presumption", while it could be used as a basis for practicalaction, could certainly not be taken as a formal acknowledgement of the obligationscontained in a given treaty, since it could be unilaterally reversed at any time inrespect of any treaty. Finally, it should be emphasized that such "declarations ofprinciples" are not sent to the Secretary-General in his capacity as depositary ofmultilateral treaties, but for the purpose of circulation to Member States of theUnited Nations and the specialized agencies.

7. The same reasoning applies to general provisions of succession contained in"devolution agreements" concluded between the new States and the States formerlyresponsible for their international relations. Here again, the very general wordingdoes not allow for a formal action to be taken by the Secretary-General as the depos-itary of an individual treaty. To quote the exchange of letters of 20 June 1966between the United Kingdom and The Gambia, for instance: " . . . it is the under-standing of the (two Governments) that the Government of The Gambia are inagreement (i) that all obligations and responsibilities of the Government of theUnited Kingdom which arose from any valid instrument applying to The Gambiaimmediately before the 18th of February, 1965, continued to apply to The Gambiaand were assumed by the Government of The Gambia as from that date . . .".

Apart from the difficulty just mentioned, it should be stressed that participationin a multilateral treaty is normally the result of procedures specifically provided bythe treaty and effected with the parties to that treaty or with the depositary appointedby them. A change in participation entails a change in the obligations and rights ofall parties to the treaty, and it cannot therefore result from the provisions of anothertreaty, by virtue of the rule Pacta tertiis nee nocent nee prosunt which has beencodified as article 34 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties.

In the case of The Gambia, as a matter of fact, you will note that specific notifi-cations of succession were transmitted to the Secretary-General after the conclusion

200

of the exchange of letters of 20 June 1966: such notifications were, of course, depositedwith the Secretary-General, and The Gambia is listed in the official records as aparty to the treaties concerned. No such notification, however, has been received fromThe Gambia in respect of the Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs.

24 July 1975

35. STATUS IN REGARD TO THE INTERNATIONAL COCOA AGREEMENT 1972 OF A NEWLYINDEPENDENT STATE TO WHOSE TERRITORY THE AGREEMENT HAD BEEN EXTENDEDPRIOR TO INDEPENDENCE (1) DURING THE NINETY-DAY PERIOD WITHIN WHICHSUCH A STATE MAY NOTIFY THE SECRETARY-GENERAL THAT IT ASSUMES THERIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS OF A CONTRACTING PARTY; OR (2) AFTER THIS PERIOD HASEXPIRED WITHOUT SUCH A NOTIFICATION HAVING BEEN MADE

Letter to the Secretary of the Council, International Cocoa Organization

1. I refer to your letter concerning the status, in regard to the InternationalCocoa Agreement 1972,88 of [name of a dependent territory to which the Agreementwas extended under article 70 (1) of the Agreement], once the territory attainsindependence.

2. You raised two questions:(1) What would be the status of the newly independent State in regard to the

Agreement from the date of its independence until the date when it hasnotified the Secretary-General, in accordance with article 70 (4), that ithas assumed the rights and obligations of a Contracting Party?

(2) What would be the legal position if at the expiration of the ninety-dayperiod provided for by article 70 (4), the newly independent State hadnot made the notification?

3. Since our exchanges on the subject, these questions have been settled in away, because the State in question has notified the Secretary-General, immediatelyupon independence, that it had assumed the rights and obligations of a ContractingParty to the Agreement. However, the same situation could arise in connexion withanother territory, and therefore our comments in this regard might still be useful.

4. The difficulty, as we see it, results from the ambiguous nature of the notifi-cation provided for by article 70 (4) of the present Agreement:89 while its veryterms suggest that it is much in the nature of a standard notification of succession,giving any retroactive effect thereto would seem to run counter to the provision inthe same article 70 (4), to the effect that the notifying State "shall, as from the dateof such notification, be a Contracting Party to this Agreement". Also, retroactiveeffect could hardly be reconciled with various other provisions in the Agreement whichimply that the membership of the International Cocoa Organization be known withcertainty at all times.

88TD/COCOA.3/9.89 Article 70 (4) reads as follows:

"(4) When a territory to which this Agreement has been extended under para-graph 1 subsequently attains independence, the Government of that territory may within90 days after the attainment of independence, declare by notification to the Secretary-General of the United Nations, that it has assumed the rights and obligations of aContracting Party to this Agreement. It shall, as from the date of such notification,be a Contracting Party to this Agreement. If such a Party is an exporting member andis not listed in Annex A or Annex C the Council shall, as appropriate, establish a basicquota for it which shall be deemed to be listed in Annex A. If such Party is listed inAnnex A, the basic quota specified therein shall be the basic quota for that Party."

201

5. In order to avoid a similar difficulty in the case of the 1975 Cocoa Agree-ment, we have proposed, through our Legal Liaison Officer in Geneva, to make presentparagraph 4 into sub-paragraph (a), and to add a new paragraph (b) along thefollowing lines:

"(b) The Government of a new State which intends to make a notificationunder the preceding paragraph but which has not yet been able to complete theprocedure necessary to enable it to do so may notify the Secretary-General ofthe United Nations that it will apply this Agreement provisionally. Such a Gov-ernment shall be a provisional member of the Organization until it makes itsnotification under the preceding paragraph or until the expiry of the 90-dayperiod referred to therein, whichever is earlier."

Thus a new State would not be treated as a party to the Agreement or a member ofthe Organization until it had effected one of the two notifications provided for bythe new article 70 (4). A new State which had made a notification under article70 (4) (b) would cease to be a provisional member of the Organization if, at theexpiry of a 90-day period from the date of independence, it had not effected theformal notification provided for by the new article 70 (4)(a).90

6. We hope that no additional difficulties of that kind will be experienced inconnexion with the 1972 Agreement. Should it be the case however, the Secretary-General, as the depositary, would take note of the decisions that the InternationalCocoa Council, which is responsible for the interpretation of the Agreement underarticle 61 thereof, may adopt. A decision such as the one that you mentioned, to theeffect that a former dependent territory could be granted interim membership in theInternational Cocoa Organization, pending a formal notification by that territorythat it has assumed the rights and obligations of a Contracting Party to the Agree-ment, would appear consistent with the powers of the Council. As we pointed out,there could be difficulties in accepting as a member of the Organization a State whichhas not yet accepted the obligations of the Agreement. We agree, however, that sucha decision may constitute the best available solution on the practical plane; however,in order to avoid a controversy, such a decision should be taken without negativevote.

17 October 1975

36. PARTICIPATION IN THE INTERNATIONAL COFFEE AGREEMENT 1968—POSITION OFTHE SECRETARY-GENERAL, AS DEPOSITARY OF THE AGREEMENT, WITH RESPECTTO ENTITIES THE STATUS OF WHICH IS UNCLEAR

Cable to the Executive Director, International Coffee Organization

In response to separate requests from two national liberation movements, addressedto the Secretary-General in his capacity as depositary of the International CoffeeAgreement,91 with regard to membership in the International Coffee Organization,this office has provided the Secretary-General of the United Nations with the followingadvice:

1. Membership in the International Coffee Organization and other mattersrelating to the Organization are governed by the provisions of the International Coffee

90 In accordance with this proposal, an additional paragraph 5 along the lines of thetext quoted above has been inserted in the relevant article (article 71) of the InternationalCocoa Agreement 1975.


202

Agreement 1968, as extended.92 Aside from the depositary functions which he exerciseswith respect to the Agreement, the Secretary-General has no authority with respect tothe Agreement of the Organization.

2. Article 3 of the Agreement provides for memberchip in the Organizationof Contracting Parties and their dependent territories; where a dependent territoryachieves independence, article 6593 of the Agreement provides for the procedural stepsto be followed in order for the Government of such a territory to assume the rightsand obligations of a Contracting Party.

3. In the absence of recognition accorded by the members of the internationalcommunity, that is to say action taken by a political organ of the United Nations orone of the specialized agencies, the Secretary-General has noi authority to grant recog-nition to a government. Once such recognition is accorded by the members of theinternational community, however, the Secretary-General would, in accordance withthe provisions of article 65 of the Agreement, fulfil his depositary functions.

3 December 1975

37. DEPOSITARY PRACTICE OF THE SECRETARY-GENERAL WHEN HE RECEIVES, INCONNEXION WITH A MULTILATERAL TREATY NOT CONTAINING A RESERVATIONSCLAUSE, AN INSTRUMENT WHICH INCLUDES RESERVATIONS

Letter to the Director, Office of International Standards and Legal Affairs,United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization

1. I have the honour to refer to your recent telex message concerning thepractice of the Secretary-General as depositary of multilateral! treaties when he receives,in connexion with a multilateral treaty not containing a reservations clause, an instrumentwhich includes reservations.

92 The International Coffee Agreement 1968, which was to expire on 30 September1973, (1) was extended until 30 September 1975 with modifications by resolution No. 264of the International Coffee Council approved on 14 April 1973, and (2) was further extendeduntil 30 September 1976. A new Agreement has been concluded on 30 December 1975.

93 Article 65 of the International Coffee Agreement 1968, as; extended, reads as follows:

"Notifications in respect of Dependent Territories"(1) Any Government may, at the time of deposit of an instrument of acceptance or

accession, or at any time thereafter, by notification to the Secretary-General of the UnitedNations, declare that the extended Agreement shall apply to any of the territories for theinternational relations of which it is responsible and the extended Agreement shall apply tothe territories named therein from the date of such notification.

"(2) Any Contracting Party which desires to exercise its rights under Article 4 inrespect of any of its dependent territories, or which desires to authorize one of its dependentterritories to become part of a Member Group formed under Article 5 or 6, may do so bymaking a notification to that effect to the Secretary-General of the United Nations, eitherat the time of deposit of its instrument of acceptance or accession, or at any later time.

"(3) Any Contracting Party which has made a declaration under paragraph (1) ofthis Article may at any time thereafter, by notification to the Secretary-General of the UnitedNations, declare that the Agreement shall cease to extend to the territory named in thenotification and the Agreement shall cease to extend to such territory from the date of suchnotification.

"(4) The Government of a territory to which the Agreement has been extended underparagraph (1) of this Article and which has subsequently become independent may, within 90days after the attainment of independence, declare by notification to the Secretary-General ofthe United Nations that it has assumed the rights and obligations of a Contracting Party tothe Agreement. It shall, as from the date of such notification, become a party to the Agree-ment."

203

You ask in particular whether this practice, as described in the report of theSecretary-General dated 29 January 1964, which was issued as document A/5687,94

has been modified since the adoption of the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law ofTreaties in order to take account of the rules contained in that Convention.

2. I confirm my reply by telegram of 28 August informing you that there hasbeen no major change in this practice since resolution 1452 B (XIV) of 7 December1959, which contains the most recent instructions of the General Assembly on thesubject. As you know, the General Assembly, in that resolution, requested theSecretary-General to apply to all multilateral treaties of which he is the depositary therules laid down in resolution 598 (VI) of 12 January 1952; according to the latterresolution, if reservations were formulated in relation to a treaty not containing anyclauses on the subject the Secretary-General was to communicate the text of thereservations to all States concerned, leaving it to each State to draw legal consequencesfrom such communications.

3. In performing his depositary functions, the Secretary-General is bound bythe clauses of each treaty, by the decisions of the parties concerned and, failing these,by the instructions of the General Assembly. The Convention on the Law of Treaties(which in any event is not yet in force) is an instrument apart, the principles of whichare not automatically applicable to the activities of the Secretary-General as depositary.The Secretary-General does not believe that he has any authority, in the absence ofnew instructions from the General Assembly, to adjust his practice to Vienna Conventionrules which would be contrary to his present instructions.

4. The main difference between the present practice of the Secretary-Generalwith regard to reservations and the rules of the Vienna Convention on the Law ofTreaties concerns the time factor for implied acceptance of reservations. On this point,article 20, paragraph 5, of the Convention provides that, unless there are clauses tothe contrary in the treaty, a reservation "is considered to have been accepted by aState if it shall have raised no objection to the reservation by the end of a period of12 months after it was notified of the reservation or by the date on which it expressedits consent to be bound by the treaty, whichever is later". In accordance with theGeneral Assembly's instructions, the practice of the Secretary-General does not atpresent allow for any time factor with regard to tacit acceptance.

5. Since 1959, however, the Secretary-General has had occasion to modifyhis practice on some points not covered by the General Assembly's instructions. Forinstance, in the case of new reservations formulated by a State upon succession to treatieswhich were applicable to its territory prior to independence, it has become the customto accept the reservations in so far as they would have been permissible upon ratifi-cation or accession and to treat them, as regards the date of their entry into effect,as though they had been formulated upon ratification or accession (this means, inparticular, that the newly formulated reservations will take effect only on the expiryof the period, if any, specified by the agreement for the entry into force of ratifications,accessions, etc.). This practice has not met with any objections by the States concerned;I would refer you in this connexion to the commentaries in the report of the InternationalLaw Commission on the work of its twenty-fourth session.95

2 September 1975

94 Reproduced in the Yearbook of the International Law Commission, 1965, vol. II, p. 74.95 Official Records of the General Assembly, Twenty-seventh Session, Supplement No. 10

(A/8710/Rev.l), p. 42.

204

38. INTERNATIONAL COVENANT ON ECONOMIC, SOCIAL AND CULTURAL RIGHTS96—FULFILMENT OF THE CONDITIONS PROVIDED FOR BY ARTICLE 27 (1) OF THECOVENANT FOR THE PURPOSE OF ITS ENTRY INTO FORCE

Communication sent to all States entitled to become parties tothe aforementioned instrument9'1

I have the honour, upon instructions from the Secretary-General, to inform youthat, on 3 October 1975, the instruments of ratification by the Government of Jamaicaof the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, the Interna-tional Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the Optional Protocol to the Inter-national Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, all opened for signature at New Yorkon 19 December 1966, were deposited with the Secretary-General.

The ratification by the Government of Jamaica of the International Covenant onEconomic, Social and Cultural Rights has brought to 35 the number of instrumentsof ratification and accession deposited with the Secretary-General in so far as concernsthe said Covenant, and the conditions provided for by article 27 (1) of the latter forthe purpose of its entry into force have consequently been fulfilled.

It should be noted, however, that several of the 35 instruments thus depositedwith the Secretary-General in respect of that Covenant were accompanied with reser-vations or declarations that were communicated in due course to the States concernedby means of circular letters [see the Secretariat publication entitled Multilateral Treatiesin respect of which the Secretary-General performs depositary functions—List ofSignatures, Ratifications, Accessions etc. as at 31 December 1974 (doc. ST/LEG/SER.D/8), where all such reservations and declarations that were made before 1 January1975 are also reproduced]. Among the above-mentioned reservations three drewobjections from a signatory State (see circular letters C.N.66.1969.TREATIES-6of 7 May 1969, C.N.I34.1969.TREATIES-8 of 7 August 1969, C.N.82.1970.TREA-TIES-6 of 1 June 1970, C.N.I07.1970.TREATIES-8 of 29 July 1970, C.N.I3.1971.TREATIES-1 of 18 February 1971 and C.N.47.1971.TREATIES-2 of 15 April 1971:the reservations and objections in question also appear in the above-mentioned Sec-retariat publication).

In this connexion, it will be recalled that, by resolutions 598 (VI) and 1452 B(XIV), the General Assembly instructed the Secretary-General not to pass, in theexercise of his functions as depositary, on the legal effects of documents containingreservations or objections, and to leave it to each State to draw legal consequences fromsuch communications.

It may be assumed that, without prejudice to the position which they may adoptconcerning the application of the Covenant as between themselves and each of thereserving States, the intention of the States concerned is to have all the 35 instrumentsdeposited with the Secretary-General as at 3 October 1975 be taken into account forthe purpose of determining the date of entry into force of the Covenant: referenceis made in this regard to the Convention of 29 April 1958 on the High Seas, theentry into force of which raised a similar problem (see the Secretary-General's report(A/5687) entitled "Depositary Practice in relation to Reservations", Part II, paragraphs31 to 33, in Yearbook of the International Law Commission, 1965, Vol. II,, p. 103).

96 Opened for signature at New York on 19 December 1966. For the text see JuridicalYearbook, 1966, p. 170.

97 Under article 26, participation in the Covenant is open to any State Member of theUnited Nations or member of any of its specialized agencies, by any State Party to theStatute of the ICJ and by any other State which has been invited by the General Assemblyof the United Nations to become a party to the Covenant.

205

Accordingly, the Covenant would enter into force three months after the date of thedeposit of the instrument of ratification by Jamaica, that is to say on 3 January 1976.In the absence of a notification to the contrary by the Contracting States within90 days from the date of this letter, it will be the Secretary-General's understandingthat those States are in agreement with the above.98

3 October 1975

39. RESERVATIONS OR DECLARATIONS MADE BY STATES AT THE TIME OF SIGNING,RATIFYING OR ACCEDING TO MULTILATERAL CONVENTIONS IN RESPECT OF WHICHTHE SECRETARY-GENERAL PERFORMS DEPOSITARY FUNCTIONS—PRACTICE FOLLOWEDBY THE DEPOSITARY REGARDING COMMUNICATIONS THE NATURE OF WHICH IS

UNCLEAR, IN THE CASE OF CONVENTIONS PROVIDING FOR A SPECIFIC PROCEDURETO BE APPLIED IN RESPECT OF RESERVATIONS

Memorandum to the Deputy Director, Division of Human Rights

Your memorandum concerning communications made by States when signing,ratifying of acceding to the International Convention on the Elimination of All Formsof Racial Discrimination" raises general questions regarding the manner by whichthe Secretary-General in his capacity as the depositary of an international agreementascertains the intent of the government concerned as to the nature of a communication(reservation or declaration), and the possible legal effects of a mere declaration orstatement of interpretation on the obligations of the State concerned with respect tothe Convention.

6. Concerning the first part of that question, I would like to refer you to thereport prepared by the Secretary-General, pursuant to General Assembly resolution1452B (XIV), on the subject of the depositary practice in relation to reservations(document A/5687, reproduced in the Yearbook of the International Law Commission,1965, vol. II, p. 74), and more specifically to Part II, paragraphs 1 to 5, of that report.As you will see, the Secretary-General in his capacity as the depositary of an internationalagreement, acts solely, under the General Assembly directives, as the representativeof the parties. When a treaty—for instance, the Convention on the Elimination of AllForms of Racial Discrimination—provides for a specific procedure to be applied inrespect of reservations, the Secretary-General has of course to determine, at leasttentatively, whether the statement would result in expanding or diminishing the scopeof the treaty, in which case it should be regarded as a reservation. To that end, theSecretary-General will not necessarily abide by the description given by the Stateconcerned: he may have to explore the substance of the matter and ask for clarificationsfrom the Government. Assuming a doubt remains even after such clarifications, hemay seek from the Government an additional statement to the effect that the declarationdoes not purport to modify the application of the treaty: the latter statement will becommunicated to the other States concerned together with the first one, which willthen not be treated as a reservation. On the other hand, it has happened that a statementdescribed by a Government as a "reservation" appeared to constitute in fact a meredeclaration not modifying the scope of the treaty, and that it was communicated assuch to the States concerned after consultation with the declaring State.

7. In the case of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial

98 The Covenant entered into force on 3 January 1976.99 United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 660, p. 195; also reproduced in the Juridical Year-

book, 1965, p. 63.

206

Discrimination, the circular letters by which the Secretary-General informed the Statesentitled to become parties to the Convention of a ratification or accession accompaniedby a reservation did not include the date of entry into force of the Convention withrespect to the reserving State until the expiry of the ninety-day period provided forby article 20 of the Convention for the purpose of formulating objections to thereservations. After the expiry of the ninety-day period, another circular letter wouldbe sent to the States concerned to inform them of the entry into force of the Conventionin respect of the reserving State.

8. As to the second aspect of the general question raised in your memorandum,i.e. the procedure applied by the Secretary-General to declarations that are not deemedto constitute reservations, and the possible legal effects of such declarations, it willbe noted that all such declarations were communicated by circular letters to the Statesentitled to become parties to the Convention together with the ratifications andaccessions to which they were appended. The date of entry into force of the Conventionwith respect to the declaring State was, of course, indicated in the circular letter.Finally, declarations other than reservations should be deemed to be without legal effecton the obligations of the declaring State under the Convention, since they wouldotherwise have to be considered as reservations.

23 July 1975

B. Legal opinions of the secretariats of intergovernmental organizationsrelated to the United Nations


ATTACHMENT OF TERMINAL EMOLUMENTS OF A STAFF MEMBER

Memorandum to the Chief of Administration and Finance of a field programmeissued by the Service for Constitutional and Legal Matters

With reference to your memorandum of 18 August 1975, concerning the "saisie-arrêt" ordered by a court at the request of a creditor of Mr. X, I should like to adviseyou that the Organization enjoys immunity from every form of legal process underSections 4 and 5 of the Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the SpecializedAgencies100 to which the Government concerned has acceded and which reads asfollows:

"Section 4"The specialized agencies, their property and assets, wherever located and by

whomsoever held, shall enjoy immunity from every form of legal process except hiso far as in any particular case they have expressly waived their immunity. It is,however, understood that no waiver of immunity shall extend to any measure ofexecution.

"Section 5"The premises of the specialized agencies shall be inviolable. The property

and assets of the specialized agencies, wherever located and by whomsoever held,shall be immune from search, requisition, confiscation, expropriation and any otherform of interference, whether by executive, administrative, judicial or legislativeaction."


207

The immunities granted by these clauses have consistently been interpreted bothby the organizations of the United Nations system and by the courts of various coun-tries, as preventing the issue of a garnishee order or "saisie-arrêt" against an Organizationin respect of the salary to be paid to a staff member who has incurred a private debt(see Yearbook of the International Law Commission, 1967, Vol. II, pp. 223-226 and303).

On the other hand, it has been recognized that this interpretation, the essence ofwhich is the maintenance of freedom of the Organization enjoying the immunity, doesnot imply that the Organization may not itself decide to take part in such garnisheeproceedings, in particular if it considers that the requirements of justice so demand,but only that the determination in each case is one to be made by the Organizationitself (ibid., p. 224, para. 76).

Since the present case might well qualify for this course of action, I would suggestthat the WHO Representative inform the Foreign Ministry that the Organization, whilegenerally asserting its immunity from proceedings of this nature, has decided on avoluntary basis to refrain for the moment from paying over to the former staff memberhis terminal emoluments.

The Organization would make its decision as to whether payment should bemade to the creditor or to the former staff member as soon as the former's claim hasbeen finally determined by the competent courts and the Organization has been soinformed by the Foreign Ministry.

In the meantime, Mr. X. should be informed of the situation by copies of thejudicial documents received and should be invited to submit without delay anycomments he may wish to make and, if he contests the claim, to defend his cause inthe appropriate manner before the competent courts.

17 September 1975

2. UNIVERSAL POSTAL UNION

LIABILITY IN RESPECT OF DAMAGE CAUSED BY A CORRESPONDENCE ITEM OR BY A POSTALPARCEL TO OTHER POSTAL ITEMS (1969 TOKYO CONVENTION, ARTICLE 42, ANDPOSTAL PARCELS AGREEMENT, ARTICLE 41)

Opinion given by the International Bureau

An administration asked the International Bureau if, under article 42 of the1969 Tokyo Universal Postal Convention,101 the sender of a postal item causingdamage to another postal item is liable, within the same limits as administrationsthemselves, for any damage caused to other postal items as a result of non-compliancewith the conditions of acceptance. In its reply, the International Bureau gave thefollowing opinion.

1. The Vienna Congress of 1964 accepted proposal 3143 which introduced,with respect to letter-post items, liability similar to that already existing for sendersof postal parcels under the relevant Agreement (article 41 of the Agreement). Thetexts of articles 42 of the Convention and 41 of the Postal Parcels Agreement102 are

101 United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 809, p. 91.i°2/Z>iW., p. 260.

208

strictly identical, with the possible exception of paragraph 3, the application of whichis not really at issue in the case under consideration. These two articles should thereforehave the same scope and be applied uniformly, since the same liability is involved.

2. This liability applies to damage caused by a correspondence item or by apostal parcel to other postal items. It is quite different and independent from thatassumed by postal administrations, which varies, depending on whether letter-post itemsor postal parcels are involved. It would be wrong to suppose l:hat the wording "withinthe same limits as administrations themselves" could mean that the sender's liabilityextends solely to the loss of registered items because the liability of postal adminis-trations is limited to losses with respect to letter-post items. This phrase must beunderstood to mean that the indemnity paid to the sender of a damaged item islimited to registered items and to the indemnity paid by administrations for the lossof such items, which is at present 40 gold francs.

3. With regard to payment of the indemnity, it is the responsibility of theadministration of origin to indemnify the sender of the damaged item up to the amountpayable in cases of total loss and to recover the indemnity from the sender who is liable,since this indemnity comes under the UPU Acts and its payment incumbent on postaladministrations. Article 44 of the Convention is therefore applicable, mutatis mutandis,to the case in question. Furthermore, according to article 42, paragraph 3, of thesame Convention, where appropriate it is for the administration of origin to takeaction against the offending sender. In that event, as in cases where there is no actionat law, it is the responsibility of the administration of origin to indemnify the senderof the damaged item without awaiting the result of the action at law.,

4. The conditions governing the application of article 42 of the Convention areas follows:

(a) The damaged item must belong to one of the categories for which postaladministrations assume liability.

(b) There must be a direct and definite causal means between the damageditem and the item causing the damage.

(c) The damage must have been caused by one item to another item, withoutthis being due to fault or negligence on the part of postal administrations or carriers.

(d) The item which caused the damage must fail to meet the requirementsconcerning packaging or be subject to a prohibition under article 29 of the Convention.It should be noted that, according to article 42, paragraph 2, the acceptance by theoffice of posting of an item shall not relieve the sender of his liability.

209

Part Three

JUDICIAL DECISIONS ON QUESTIONS RELATINGTO THE UNITED NATIONS AND RELATEDINTERGOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS

Chapter VII

DECISIONS AND ADVISORY OPINIONS OF INTERNATIONALTRIBUNALS

[No decision or advisory opinion from international tribunals on questions relatingto the United Nations and related intergovernmental organizations to be reported for1975.]

213

Chapter VIII

DECISIONS OF NATIONAL TRIBUNALS

1. Austria

ADMINISTRATIVE COURT OF VIENNA(VERWALTUNGSGERICHTSHOF)

X. v. VIENNA FEDERAL POLICE BOARD: DECISION OF 11 APRIL 1975

Scope of the immunity from legal process enjoyed by officials of InternationalAtomic Energy Agency in Austria under the Agency's Headquarters Agreement

The plaintiff, from whom the respondent authority demanded payment of a fineof 5,000 schillings for drunken driving, maintained before the Court that at the timeof the automobile accident as a result of which the fine had been levied on him he hadbeen "carrying out his duties as an employee of the International Atomic EnergyAgency" and could therefore claim immunity ad hoc.

The Court noted that the plaintiff was evidently referring to article XV, section38 (a), of the Headquarters Agreement between Austria and IAEA,1 which reads asfollows:

"Officials of the IAEA shall enjoy within ... the Republic of Austria thefollowing privileges and immunities:

"(a) Immunity from legal process of any kind in respect of words spokenor written, and of acts performed by them, in their official capacity; such immunityto continue notwithstanding that the persons concerned may have ceased to beofficials of the IAEA."

The Administrative Court stated that it shared the opinion of the respondentauthority that the plaintiff's travel at the time of the infraction was of a purely privatenature and in no way arose from the exercise of his official duties on behalf of theAgency; the plaintiff was not, therefore, exempt from the jurisdiction of Austriantribunals. His allegations that the respondent authority had not studied the questionof his immunity and had not permitted him to see an allegedly essential documentsetting out the position of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs were therefore immaterial.

Since the Administrative Court was unable to establish that the respondentauthority had acted illegally, the appeal was rejected as being without foundation.


214

2. Switzerland

CANTONAL TRIBUNAL OF THE CANTON OF VAUD, CIVIL COURT

X. v. Y.: JUDGEMENT OF 14 MARCH 1975

Suit against an official of the World Health Organization enjoying immunity fromlegal process in Switzerland under the WHO Headquarters Agreement—Cross-petition by the defendant designed in particular to have the original suit declaredinadmissible by reason of the incompetence of the Tribunal—Object of theprivileges and immunities granted to WHO officials under the above-mentionedHeadquarters Agreement—Granting of time for the opposing party to take thesteps necessary for the waiving of the immunity

The plaintiff brought suit with a view to securing payment by the defendant ofa certain sum which the latter had, according to the plaintiff, retained as security forthe purpose of executing a contract for the sale of immovable property. The defendantthen submitted a cross-petition designed in particular to have the original suit declaredinadmissible on the grounds that she was an international official of the World HealthOrganization and therefore enjoyed complete immunity from legal process in Switzerland.The respondent in the cross-petition, noting that the petitioner was taking the courseof a cross-petition, concluded therefrom that she was renouncing her claim to immunityfrom legal process at least in the cross-petition and that the question of the Tribunal'scompetence to rule on the cross-petition therefore did not arise.

The judge stressed, however, that in procedural matters he was not bound bythe agreement of the parties. In studying the admissibility of the cross-petition, he notedthat the petitioner held an identity card issued by the Federal Political Department,which proved her status as a high official; she thus came within the category of officialsdefined in article 16 of the Agreement between the Federal Council and WHO con-cerning the Legal Status of that Organization in Switzerland2 and therefore enjoyedthe immunities granted to diplomatic agents by the Vienna Convention on DiplomaticRelations.3 The substance of the case being of a pecuniary nature, it followed fromarticle 31, paragraph 1, of the Vienna Convention interpreted a contrario that thepetitioner enjoyed immunity from civil jurisdiction and that the respondent could

2 United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 26, p. 331. Article 16 reads as follows:"DIPLOMATIC IMMUNITIES OF THE DIRECTOR-GENERAL

AND CERTAIN OFFICIALS"The Director-General of the World Health Organization and certain officials of

the categories designated by him and agreed to by the Swiss Federal Council shall enjoythe privileges, immunities, exemptions and facilities granted to diplomatic agents inaccordance with international law and custom."3 United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 500, p. 95. Article 31, para. 1, reads as follows:

"1. A diplomatic agent shall enjoy immunity from the criminal jurisdiction of thereceiving State. He shall also enjoy immunity from its civil and administrative jurisdic-tion, except in the case of:

"(a) a real action relating to private immovable property situated in the territoryof the receiving State, unless he holds it on behalf of the sending State for the purposesof the mission;

"(6) an action relating to sucession in which the diplomatic agent is involved asexecutor, administrator, heir or legatee as a private person and not on behalf of thesending State;

"(c) an action relating to any professional or commercial activity exercised bythe diplomatic agent in the receiving State outside his official functions."

215

secure the waiving of such immunity only through the diplomatic channel (articles25 and 26 of the above-mentioned Headquarters Agreement).

The judge pointed out, however, that, while certain WHO officials enjoyed diplomaticimmunities in abstracto, the object of those immunities, under the terms of articles21 and 22 of the Headquarters Agreement, was solely to ensure the free functioningof that organization; the immunity enjoyed by the petitioner could therefore be waived,and it would have been unduly formalistic to declare the Court incompetent withoutgiving the respondent an opportunity to take steps aimed at securing the waiving ofthe immunity.

The judge continued as follows:

"The principle is that, when an official of an international organization invokesthe benefit of immunity from legal process on the basis of the provisions of aheadquarters agreement which permits the Federal Political Department torequest the said organization to waive the immunity, the opposing party shouldbe granted time to take the steps necessary for the waiving of the immunity,since the invalidation of the suit must be expressly provided for in order to bedeclared. The grounds of immunity from legal process is an exception which doesnot always have an absolute and definitive character, at least so long as an authoritymay be called upon to rule on a request that the immunity should be waivedand so long as the competent authority has not refused to waive it."

The judge also noted that, instead of warning the respondent of the privilegeshe enjoyed, the petitioner had always concealed from him her status as a WHOofficial and had, on the contrary, taken steps with a view to a trial before the judicialauthorities. He observed that negotiations prior to the commencement of a trialestablished a relationship between the parties which was sanctioned by objective law.Of course, each party was in principle the defender of his own interests and shouldacquaint himself with the chances and perils of the acts which he was contemplating,but negotiations sometimes called for a certain degree of co-operation. Fairness anddispatch required that everyone should respect certain rules in the exercise of his rights,even if he exercised them through judicial proceedings. It would therefore have beeninequitable that the petitioner should have gained any benefit by acting contrary togood faith.

The judge consequently granted the respondent a period of one month to secure thewaiving of the petitioner's immunity from legal process.

216

Part Four

BIBLIOGRAPHY

LEGAL BIBLIOGRAPHY OF THE UNITED NATIONS AND RELATED

INTERGOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS

MAIN HEADINGS

A. INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS IN GENERAL1. General2. Particular questions

B. UNITED NATIONS1. General2. Particular organs3. Particular questions or activities

C. INTERGOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS RELATED TO THE UNITED NATIONS

219

A. INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS IN GENERALORGANISATIONS INTERNATIONALES EN GÉNÉRALME^KAYHAPOAHblE OPFAHHSAHMH B IJEJIOMORGANIZACIONES INTERNACIONALES EN GENERAL

1. GeneralOuvrages générauxOôufue meMbiBibliografia general

Bowett, D. W. The law of international institutions. 3. ed. London, Stevens and Sons, 1975, 382 p.(Library of world affairs, 60.)

Doxey, Margaret. International organisation in foreign policy perspective. In Yearbook of worldaffairs, 1975. London, Stevens and Sons, 1975, p. 173-195.

Ecobescu, Nicolae et Ion Voicu. Les organisations internationales dans le monde contemporain.Revue roumaine d'études internationales (Bucarest)9:103-118, 1975, n° 2.

Xissfnger, H. A. International law, world order, and human progress. New York State Bar journal(Albany, N.Y.)47:542-544, November 1975.

Palfreeman, A. C. From international law to peace science. In Annuaire de l'Association desauditeurs et anciens auditeurs de l'Académie de droit international de La Haye, v. 42/43,1972/1973. La Haye, Martinus Nijhoff, 1975, p. 107-132.

Paone, Pasquale. Diritto e organizzazione internationale: spunti critici e ricostruttivi. Rivista didiritîo internazionale (Milano)58:469-508, 1975, no. 3.

Pecourt Garcia, E. La acciôn normativa de las organizaciones internacionales. In Anuario dederecho internacional, v. 1, 1974. Pamplona, Departamento de Derecho InternacionalPûblico y Privado, Facultad de Derecho, Universidad de Navarra, 1974, p. 165-222.

Piquemal, Alain. Du droit international à une science de la paix. In Annuaire de l'Association desauditeurs et anciens auditeurs de l'Académie de droit international de La Haye, v. 42/43,1972/1973. La Haye, Martinus Nijhoff, 1975, p. 133-154.

Puig, Juan Carlos. Derecho de la comunidad internacional. Buenos Aires, Depalma, 1974-1 v.

Seara Vâsquez, Modesto. Tratado general de la organizaciôn internacional. Mexico [1974], 1066 p.(Fondo de Cultura Econômica, Mexico, Secciôn de obras de politica y derecho.)

Sepûlveda, C. Implications for thé future; design of viable international institutions. Naturalresources journal (Albuquerque, N. Mex.)15:215-221, January 1975.

Takano, Yuichi. The law of international organizations. Rev. ed. Tokyo, Yuhikaku, 1975, 650 p.In Japanese.

Yalem, R. J. The concept of world order. In Yearbook of world affairs, v. 29, 1975. London,Stevens and Sons, 1975, p. 320-336.

2. Particular questionsOuvrages concernant des questions particulièresOmdejibHbie eonpocbiCuestiones particulars

Beirlaen, André. La distinction entre les différends juridiques et les différends politiques dans lapratique des organisations internationales. Revue-belge de droit international (Bruxelles)l 1:405-441, 1975, n° 2.

Bernhàrdt, R. The nature and field of application of the internal law of international organizations.Law and State (Tubingen)10:7-26, 1974.

Busch, J.-D. Dienstrechtsreform der UN-Organisationen. Ôffentliche- Verwaltung (Stuttgart)28:15-23, Januar 1975.

220

Constas, D. C. Capacity of international organizations to exercise political "pressure". Revuehellénique de droit international (Athènes)26-27:338-360, 1973-1974.

Frey-Wouters, E. The relevance of regional arrangements to internal conflicts in the developingworld. In Moore, J. N. Law and civil war in the modern world. Baltimore, Md., JohnsHopkins Press, 1974, p. 458-496.

Harremoes, E. Le rôle des organisations internationales en matière pénale. Revue internationale dedroit pénal (Paris)45:465-473, 1974.

Malinverni, G. Le règlement des différends dans les organisations internationales économiques.Leiden, Sijthoff, 1974.251 p. (Institut universitaire de hautes études internationales. Collectionde droit international, 3.)

Mitic, Miodrag. Becka konvencija o predstavljanju drzava u njihovim odnosima sa medunarodnimorganizacijama univerzalnog karaktera; cetvrta kodifikacija diplomatskog prava. Medunarodniproblemi (Beograd)27:84-100, 1975, no. 2.

Summaries in English and Russian.[The Vienna Convention on the Representation of States in International Organizations

of a Universal Character.]

Monaco, R. Capacités de droit privé des organisations internationales. In Cacmmerer, Ernst von[et al.]. Festschrift fur Pan J. Zepos anlàsslich seines 65. Geburtstages am I. Dezember 1973.Athen, Freiburg, 1973, p. 475-490.

Salmon, J. J. A. Le procédé de la fiction en droit international public. Revue belge de droit inter-/wrt0/w/(Bruxelles)10:ll-35, 1974, n° 1.

Schroer, Friedrish. On thé application of state immunity from enforcement measures to inter-national organisations. In Revue égyptienne de droit international, v. 30, 1974. Le Caire,Société égyptienne de droit international, 1974, p. 76-90.

Sinha, S. Prakash. Identifying a principle of international law today. In Canadian yearbook ofinternational law, v. 11,1973. Vancouver, B.C., University of British Columbia, 1974, p. 106-122.

Trêves, T. Les unités de compte dans les conventions et organisations internationales. In Annuairefrançais de droit international, v. 20,1974. Paris, Centre national de la recherche scientifique,1975, p. 753-772.

Weiss, T. G. International bureaucracy; an analysis of the operation of functional and globalinternational secretariats. Lexington, Mass., Heath, 1975, 187 p. (Lexington books.)

B. UNITED NATIONSORGANISATION DES NATIONS UNIESOPFAHH3ALl,H.fl OEtËAMHEHHblX HAIJHMNACIONES UNIDAS

1. GeneralOuvrages générauxOôiifue meMbiBibliografia general

Bolintineanu, Alexandru. Preventive multilateral diplomacy of the United Nations. Revue roumained'études internationales (Bucarest)9:l51-161, 1975, n° 2.

Bossano, L. De la Carta del Atlântico a las Naciones Unidas. Estudios de derecho (Medellin,Colombia)35:221-241, 1974.

Brown, R. P. Jr. United Nations at thirty; what next? American Bar Association journal(Chicago)61:1218-1219, October 1975.

Cassan, H. Le consensus dans la pratique des Nations Unies. In Annuaire français de droit inter-national, v. 20,1974. Paris, Centre national de la recherche scientifique, 1975, p. 456-485.

221

Chaudhuri, H. Fundamentals of human unity. Eastern journal of international law (Madras)6:261-269, January 1975.

Ciobanu, Dan. Preliminary objections related to the jurisdiction of the United Nations politicalorgans. The Hague, Martinus Nijhoff, 1975, 230 p.

Conforti, Benedetto. Le rôle de l'accord dans le système des Nations Unies. In Recueil des coursde l'Académie de droit international de La Haye, 1974-11. Leyde, A. W. Sijthoff, 1975,p. 203-288.

Degan, V. D. La portée juridique des principes des Nations Unies. In Revue égyptienne de droitinternational, v. 30, 1974. Le Caire, Société égyptienne de droit international, 1974, p. 1-26.

Ecobescu, Nicolae et Victor Duculescu. Creçterea rolului organizaîei natiunilor unité în lumeacontempranà. Studii si cercetâri juridice (Bucuresti)20:229-234, 1975, no. 3.

[L'accroissement du rôle de l'Organisation des Nations Unies dans le monde contem-porain.]

Edmonds, I. G. The United Nations; successes and failures. Indianapolis, Bobbs-Merrill [1974],202 p. Illus.

Falk, Richard A. American attack on the United Nations; an interprétation. Harvard internationallaw journal (Cambridge, Mass.)l6:566-575, summer 1975.

Furukawa, Ujiyuki. Introduction to the study of the United Nations; a theory of world structure.Kyoto, Kokusai Shuppan Sha, 1974, 428 p.

In Japanese.

Holly, D. A. L'O.N.U., le système économique et la politique internationale. International organiza-tion (Madison, Wis.)29:469-485, spring 1975.

Jankowitsch, Odette. Survey of international lawmaking by the United Nations'1973-1975.Journal of international law and economics (Washington, D.C.)10:761-795, August-September1975.

Jankowitsch, Peter. The utility of the United Nations system. Journal of international law and eco-nomics (Washington, D.C.)10:689-699, August-September 1975.

La Pira, Gaetano. Le Nazioni Unite tra crisi e tentativi di rilancio. In Annuario di politica inter-nazionale, v. 25, 1972. Milano, Istituto per gli Studi di Politica Internazionale, 1974, p. 283-296.

Maliâ, M. The United Nations in a changing world. Revue roumaine d'études internationales(Bucarest)9:229-235, 1975.

Munch, F. Tàtigkeit der Vereinten Nationen in vôlkerrechtlichen Fragen. Archiv des Vôlkerrechts(Tubingen) 16:278-306, 1975.

Niciu, M. Rolul O.N.U. in promovarea principiilor dreptului international in relaîile dintre state.Bucuresti, Editura politica, 1973, 53 p. (Problème internationale.)

Rossolini, R. Considerazioni sull'evoluzione attuale délia comunità internazionale. Archiviogiuridico "Filippo Serafini" (Modena, Italy) 189:169-179, Juglio 1975.

Russo, C. Nazioni Unite; valutazione di un passato e prospettive future. Comunità internazionale(Padova)29:612-623, 1974.

Schwarzenberger, G. The United Nations' system in international judicial perspective. Cambrianlaw review (Aberystwyth)S : 61-71, 1974.

Skubiszewski, Krzysztof. Recommendations of the United Nations and municipal courts. InBritish yearbook of international law, v. 46,1972-73. London, Oxford U.P., 1975, p. 353-364.

Sprôte, Wolfgang. Die Vereinten Nationen und ihre Spezialorganisationen ; Dokumente. Hrsg. v.W. Sprôte [and] H. Wunsche. Berlin, Staatsverlag der Deutschen Demokratischen Republik,1974-

Text partly in English, French, German and Russian.Tavernier, P. L'année des Nations Unies, problèmes juridiques, 1974. In Annuaire français de

droit international, v. 20, 1974V Paris, Centre national de la recherche scientifique, 1975,p. 486-520.

222

Tiewul, S. Azadon. Relations between the United Nations Organization and the Organization ofAfrican Unity in the settlement of secessionist conflicts. Harvard international law journal(Cambridge, Mass.)16:259-302, spring 1975.

Waldheim, Kurt. Die Rolle der Vereinten Nationen in der Weltpolitik. Vereinte Nationen 23:1-5.February 1975.

Weissberg, Guenter. United Nations movements toward world law. International and comparativelaw quarterly (London)24:460-524, July 1975.

2. Particular organsOuvrages concernant certains organesOmdejibHbie opzamiOrganos particulares

Administrative TribunalTribunal administratifAAMHHHCTpaTHBHblH TpHOVHaJI

Tribunal Administrative»

Udina, Manlio. In tema di giurisdizione amministrativa nelPordinamento delle Nazioni Unite,Padova, Edizioni Cedam, 1973, [5] p.Extract from: Studi in memoria di Enrico Guicciardi, v. 1, p. [3]-7.

General AssemblyAssemblée générale

Asamblea General

Abbott, Alden [and others]. The General Assembly, 29th session; the decredentialization of SouthAfrica. Harvard international law journal (Cambridge, Mass.)16: 576-588, summer 1975.

Die 28. Generalversammlung der Vereinten Nationen; Bericht der Bundesregierung an denBundestag. Vereinte Nationen (Bonn)22:119-125, August 1974.

Bailey, Sydney D. Some procedural problems in the U.N. General Assembly. World today (London)31: 24-28, January 1975.

Boratyriski, Stefan. Zgromadzenie Ogôlne ONZ. Sprawy miçdzynarcdowe (Warszawa)26:86-100,lipiec-sierpien 1975.

[United Nations General Assembly.]Dubitzky, Jonathan. The General Assembly's international economics. Harvard international law

journal (Cambridge, Mass.)l 6: 670-676, summer 1975.

Graefrath, B. On the work of the Third Commission of the XXVIIIth United Nations GeneralAssembly. German foreign policy (Berlin)13: 592-603, 1974.

Raton, P. Les travaux de la Commission juridique de la XXIXe Assemblée générale des NationsUnies. In Annuaire français de droit international, v. 20, 1974. Paris, Centre national de larecherche scientifique, 1975, p. 521-552.

Sohn, Louis B. Due process in the United Nations. American journal of international law (Washing-ton, D.C.)69: 620-622, July 1975.

Stone, J. Palestinian resolution; zenith or nadir of the General Assembly. New York Universityjournal of international law and politics (New York)8:l-18, spring 1975.

Tewary, Indra Narayan. The peace-keeping power of the United Nations General Assembly. NewDelhi, S. Chand [1974], 195 p.

United Nations, 29th session. Harvard international law journal (Cambridge, Mass.)16:565-582,summer 1975.

223

International Court of JusticeCour internationale de Justice

Corte Internacional de Justicia

Aartsen, B. Corte Internacional de La Haya. Justicia (Mexico)33:22-27, septiembre 1974.

Arbour, J. M. Quelques réflexions sur les mesures conservatoires indiquées par la Cour inter-nationale de Justice. Cahiers de droit [Université Laval] (Québec) 16; ;53 1-573, 1975.

Bollecker-Stern, Brigitte. L'affaire des essais nucléaires français devant la Cour internationale deJustice. In Annuaire français de droit international, v. 20, 1974. Paris, Centre national de larecherche scientifique, 1975, p. 299-333.

Briney, Roger A. The Icelandic fisheries dispute; a decision is finally rendered. Georgia journal ofinternational and comparative law (Athens, Georgia)5: 248-256, 1975, no. 1.

Carbone, Sergio. Promise in international law; a confirmation of its binding force. In Italianyearbook of international law, v. 1, 1975. Napoli, Editoriale Scientifica, 1975, p. 166-172.

Churchill, R. R. The fisheries jurisdiction cases; the contribution of the International Court ofJustice to the debate on coastal states' fisheries rights. International and comparative lawquarterly (London)24:82-105, January 1975.

Cocâtre-Zilgien, A. La France devant ses juges; remarques sur la "compétence" de la Cour inter-nationale de Justice dans l'affaire des essais nucléaires. Le juge et le droit public, I. Paris,Librairie générale de droit et de jurisprudence, 1974, p. 173-186.

Dongen, A. F. van. Hof en de Spaanse Sahara; vonnis of advies? Nederlands juristenblad (Zwolle)50:1439-1447, december 1975.

Elian, George. Les débats de l'Assemblée générale de l'Organisation des Nations Unies concernantle rôle de la Cour internationale de Justice dans la vie internationale. Revue roumaine d'étudesinternationales (Bucarest)9: 139-1 50, 1975, n° 2.

Evans, A. E. Failure of party to appear; jurisdiction of the court — fisheries jurisdiction, preferentialrights of coastal state, and historic rights of other states. American journal of international law(Washington, D.C.)69:154-174, January 1975.

<I>e,aopoB B. H. KpnTHKa HCKOTOPMX njianos nepecMoxpa ponn Me»myHapOflHoro Cyfla OOH.• CoeemcKoe zocydapcmeo u npaeo (MocKBa), JVs 9:110-115, 1975.

[Critiques of plans for reviewing a role of UN International Court.]

Fitzgerald, G. F. The judgment of the International Court of Justice in the appeal relating to thejurisdiction of the ICAO Council. In Canadian yearbook of international law, v. 12, 1974.Vancouver, B.C., University of British Columbia, 1974, p. 153-185.

Frank, Thomas M. Word made law; the decision of the ICJ in the nuclear test cases. Americanjournal of international law (Washington, D.C.)69: 61 2-620, July 1975.

Golden, Jeffrey. National groups and the nomination of judges of the International Court ofJustice; a preliminary report. International lawyer (Washington, D.C.)9: 333-349, April 1975.

Hevener, N. K. 1971 South- West African opinion; a new international juridical philosophy.International and comparative law quarterly (London)24:791-810, October 1975.

Institut universitaire de hautes études internationales, Genève. Précis de la jurisprudence de laCour internationale. Edité par K. Marek. La Haye, Martinus Nijhoff, 1974- , v. 1.

Title and text in English and French.V. 1 : Cour permanente de Justice internationale.

International law — International Court of Justice. Iceland's regulations establishing a fishery zonewith a 50-mile limit are not opposable to the United Kingdom and the Federal Republic ofGermany. Texas international law journal (Austin, Tex.)10:150-171, winter 1975.

Isaïa, H. Opinions dissidentes, des juges socialistes dans la jurisprudence de la Cour internationalede Justice. Revue générale de droit international public (Paris)79: 657-718, juillet-septembre1975.

224

Khan, R. The fisheries jurisdiction case. Indian journal of international law (New Delhi)!5:1-16,January-March 1975.

Lachs, Manfred. La Cour internationale de Justice dans le monde d'aujourd'hui. Revue belge dedroit international (Bruxelles)l 1:548-561,1975, n° 2.

Lellouche, Pierre. The International Court of Justice; the nuclear tests; cases. Harvard internationallaw journal (Cambridge, Mass.)l 6:614-637, summer 1975.

McWhinney, Edward. International law-making and the judicial process; the World Court and théFrench nuclear tests case. Syracuse journal of international law and commerce (Syracuse,N.Y.)3:9-46, spring 1975.

Mack, Timothy C. Polemic in the International Court of Justice. Syracuse journal of internationallaw and commerce (Syracuse, N.Y.)3:183-203, spring 1975.

Magiera, Siegfried. Zur Bezeichnung vorsorglicher Massnahmen durch den InternationalenGerichtshof; Verfahrenseffektivitat gegen staatliche Souverànitat. In Jahrbuch fur interna-tionales Recht, v. 17, 1974. Berlin, Duncker und Humblot, 1975, p. 253-282.

Martin, P. M. Renouveau des mesures conservatoires; les ordonnances récentes de la Courinternationale de Justice. Journal du droit international (Paris)102:45-59, janvier-février-mars1975.

Mendelson, M. H. Interim measures of protection in cases of contested jurisdiction. In Britishyearbook of international law, v. 46, 1972-73. London, Oxford U.P., 1975, p. 259-322.

Morelli, G. Eccenzioni preliminari di merito? Rivista di diritto internazionale (Milano)58:5-ll,1975, no. 1.

Nawaz, M. K. The North Sea continental shelf cases revisited. Indian journal of international law(New Delhi)! 5:506-520, October-December 1975.

Nguyen Quoc Dinh. Evolution de la jurisprudence de la Cour internationale de La Haye relativeau problème de la hiérarchie des normes conventionnelles. In Mélanges offerts à MarcelWaline. Le juge et le droit public, I. Paris,Librairie générale de droit et de jurisprudence, 1974,p. 215-232.

Oellers-Frahm, K. Die einstweilige Anordnung in der internationalen Gerichtsbarkeit. Berlin,Springer, 1975, 168 p. (Beitràge zum auslândischen ôffentlichen Recht und Volkerrecht, 66.)

Petrén, B. A. S. Some thoughts on the future of the International Court of Justice. In Netherlandsyearbook of international law, v. 6, 1975. Leiden, A. W. Sijthofl', 1975, p. 59-76.

Prott, Lyndel V. The style of judgment in the International Court of Justice. In Australian yearbookof international law, 1970-1973. Sydney, Butterworths, 1975, p. 75-90.

Reuter, P. Extension du droit international aux dépens du droit national devant le juge inter-national. In Mélanges offerts à Marcel Waline. Le juge et le droit public, I. Paris, Librairiegénérale de droit et de jurisprudence, 1974, p. 241-258.

Reynaud, André. Les différends du plateau continental de la mer du Nord devant la Cour inter-nationale de Justice; la volonté, la nature et le droit. Paris, Librairie générale de droit et dejurisprudence, 1975, 245 p., maps. (Bibliothèque de droit international, 78.)

Text partly in English and French.Bibliography: p. 219-239.

Rosenne, Shabtai. Documents on the International Court of Justice. Leiden, A. W. Sijthoff, 1974,391 p.

Text partly in English and French.

Rousseau, C. Crise de la justice internationale? In Mélanges offerts à Marcel Waline. Le juge et ledroit public, I. Paris, Librairie générale de droit et de jurisprudence, 1974, p. 259-265.

Seidl-Hohenveldern, I. Der internationale Gerichtshof und das Ideal eines weltweiten Richter-staates. In Dimensionen des Redits; Gedàchtnisschrift fur René Marcic. Berlin, Duncker undHumblot, 1974, p. 675-688.

225

Smith, Terry K. International Court of Justice—jurisdiction—resolutions to expand the jurisdictionof the International Court of Justice and to improve the Court's image as a viable alternativeto achieve pacific settlement of international disputes. Georgia journal of international andcomparative law (Athens, Ga.)5:314-325, winter 1975.

Sohn, L. B. Senate resolutions relating to the International Court of Justice. American journal ofinternational law (Washington, D.C.)69:92-96, January 1975.

Sugihara, Takane. The advisory function of the International Court of Justice. In Japanese annualof international law, no. 18,1974. Tokyo, the International Law Association of Japan, 1974,p. 23-50.

Sugihara, Takane. The right of a state to sue in the general interest before the International Courtof Justice. Kokusaiho gaiko zasshi (Tokyo)74:253-294, October 1975; 74:309-342, December1975.

In Japanese.

Sur, Serge. Les affaires des essais nucléaires (Australie c. France; Nouvelle-Zélande c. France;C.I.J., arrêts du 20 décembre 1974). Revue générale de droit international public (Paris)79:972-1027, octobre-décembre 1975.

Terré, François. Théorie générale de la procédure et droit international public. Zeitschrift furSchweizerisches Recht (Basel) 115:41-59, 1974, n° 1.

Thierry, Hubert. Les arrêts du 20 décembre 1974 et les relations de la.France avec la Cour inter-nationale de Justice. In Annuaire français de droit international, v. 20, 1974. Paris, Centrenational de la recherche scientifique, 1975, p. 286-298.

Villani, Ugô. Preliminary objections in the new rules of the International Court of Justice. InItalian yearbook of international law, v. 1,1975. Napoli, Editoriale Scientifica, 1975, p. 206-221.

Wengler, W. Problème der Bestellung des von der Partei nicht ernannten Schiedsrichters imVôlkerrecht. Revista espanola de derecho internacional (Madrid)25:425-439, 1972, no. 1-4.

3a6irafijio, B. K. IIpo6jieMa nporajimi B Miacnapo^HOMy npaBi i KOMneTeimbi MiacHapoflnoroCyzry OOH. IIpo6jieMH HpaBoaHaBCTBa (KHÏB) Jfc 8: 26-105,1973.

Regional economic commissionsCommissions économiques régionalesPerHOHam>Hbie aKOHOMiniecKue KOMHCCHHComisiones econômicas régionales

Goy, R. L'évolution des commissions économiques régionales des Nations Unies. In Annuairefrançais de droit international, v. 20,1974. Paris, Centre national de la recherche scientifique,1975, p. 595-612.

SecrétariatSecrétariatCeKperapHarSecretaria

Hâta, Kazuhiko. The personnel management system of the United Nations Secretariat: a systemsapproach. Ann Arbor, Mich., University Microfilms [1975], 379 p.

Diss. Claremont Graduate School, Claremont, Calif., 1973.

Kaladharan Nayar, M. G. Dag Hammarskjold and U Thant; the evolution of their office. CaseWestern Reserve journal of international law (San Diego, Calif.)7:36-83, winter 1974.

Pellet, Alain. La grève des fonctionnaires internationaux. Revue générale de droit internationalpublic (Paris)79:932-971, octobre-décembre 1975.

Sokalski, Henryk J. Zasada reprezentacji geograficznej w Sekretariazie ONZ. Sprawy miedzyna-rodowe (Warszawa)27:77-90, maj 1974.

[The principle of geographical representation at the United Nations Secretariat.]

226

Security CouncilConseil de sécuritéCOBCT EeaonacHOCTHConsejo de Seguridad

, H. A. K sonpocy 06 34>4>eKXHBHOCTH pesojnoinift Cosera EesonacHOcra OOH. B KH. :CoseTCKHâ eJKeroflHHK MeacflynapoflHoro npasa 1973. MocKsa, IfaflaTeJibCTBO Hayica, 1975,c. 100-114.

Summary in English.[On thé question of effectiveness of resolutions of the UN Security Council.]

Bailey, ^Sydney D. The procedure of the UN Security Council. Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1975,424 'p. '

Commission to Study the Organization of Peace. Modernizing the Security Council; special report.Chairman: L. B. Sohn. Vice-Chairman : R. N. Swift. N.Y., 1974., 22 p.

Rhone, Richard Stratton. The behavior of the eleven member United Nations Security Council :theory and practice. Ann Arbor, Mich., University Microfilms [1974], 333 p.

Diss. Pennsylvania. State University. Dept. of Political Science, 1973.

Subbarao, M. V. The use of veto in relation to the pacific settlement of disputes in the SecurityCouncil of the United Nations, 1946-1965. Delhi, New Heights [1974], 244 p.

Bibliography: p. 224-244.

United Nations ForcesForces des Nations UniesBoopyjKCHHbie CHJIU Opramnainm OfoeAHHemtbix HanHftFuerzas de las Naciones Unidas

El-Ayouty, Yassin. The United Nations Truce Supervision Organisation in Palestine (UNTSO). InRevue égyptienne de droit international, v. 30, 1974. Le Caire, Société égyptienne de droitinternational, 1974, p. 120-133.

United Nations Industrial Development OrganizationOrganisation des Nations Unies pour le développement industrielOpraffiuauHH OffcejumeHHux Haunii no npoMbiuuieiniOMy paiBimnoOrganization de las Naciones Unidas para el Desarrollo Industrial

Kurth, Eberhard. Neue internationale Wirtschaftsordnung im Industriebereich ? UNIDO-Generalkonferenz in Lima wirft ihre Schatten voraus. Vereinte Nationen (Bonn)23:10-16Februar 1975.

3. Particular questions or activitiesOuvrages concernant des questions ou activités particulièresOmdejibHbie eonpocu u/iu eudbi denme/ibHOcmuCuestiones y actividades particulares

Charter revisionRévision de la CharteITepecMOrp VcraBaRévision de la Carta

Hayashi, Moritaka. Revision and review of the Charter of the United Nations. Kokusai mondai(Tokyo)no. 189:40-51, December 1975.

In Japanese.

Lall, Arthur. Problems and prospects of revision of the UN Charter. India quarterly (New Delhi)31:111-120, April-June 1975.

227

Potocny, Miroslav. Chartu OSN trcba dodrzovat a ne revidovat. Mezindrodnivztahy (Praha) 1 0 : 24-34, 1975, no. 6.

Civil warGuerre civile

Guerra civil

Baxter, R. R. lus in bello interne; the present and future law. In Moore, J. N. Law and civil warin the modern world. Baltimore, Md., Johns Hopkins Univ. Press, 1974, p. 518-536.

Ciobanu, Dan. The concept and the determination of the existence of armed conflicts not of aninternational character. Rivista di diritto internazionale (Milano)58: 43-79, 1975, no. 1.

Mayer-Tasch, P. C. Guerril la warfare and international law. Law and state (Tubingen)S: 7-24, 1974.Moreillon, Jacques. Le Comité international de la Croix-Rouge et la protection des détenus poli-

t iques; les activités du CICR en faveur des personnes incarcérées dans leur propre pays àl'occasion de troubles ou de tensions internes. Lausanne, éditions l'Age d'homme, 1973, 303 p.

Schachtcr, O. The United Nations and internal conflict. In Moore, J. N. Law and civil war in themodern world. Baltimore, Md., Johns Hopkins Univ. Press, 1974, p. 401-445.

Scheuner, U. War and civil strife on thé présent international scene. Law and state (Tiibingen)9:7-23, 1974.

Sohn, L. B. Civil wars; guidelines for states and the United Nations. //; Moore, J. N. Law and civilwar in the modern world. Baltimore, Md., Johns Hopkins Univ. Press, 1974, p. 582-587.

Taubenfeld, H. J. The applicability of the laws of war in civil war. In Moore, J. N. Law and civilwar in the modern world. Baltimore, Md., Johns Hopkins Univ. Press, 1974, p. 499-517.

Veuthey, Michel. Les conflits armés de caractère non international et le droit humanitaire. Milano,A. Giuffré, 1975, [88] p.

Reprinted from: Current problems of international law; essays on U.N. law and on thelaw of armed conflict, p. 179-266.

Collective securitySécurité collectiveKojiJieKTiiBHan 6e3onacHocTi>Seguridad colectiva

Arntz, J. Der Begriff der Friedensbedrohung in Satzung und Praxis der Vereinten Nationen.Berlin, Duncker und Humblot, 1975, 198 p. (Schriften zum Volkerrecht, 46.)

Kim, Tonghun. The collective security system of the United Nations after thir ty years. Kokusaimondai (Tokyo)no. 189:14-27, December 1975.

In Japanese.Naidu, M. V. R. Collective security and the United Nations; a definition of the UN security

system. New York, St. Martin's Press, 1974, 164 p.Ruggie, J. G. Contingencies, constraints, and collective security; perspectives on UN involvement

in international disputes. International organization (Madison, Wis.)28: 493-520, summer 1974.Watanabe, Yukio. Articles 51 and 53 of the United Nations Charter. Fukuoka University review of

law (Fukuoka)l 9: 639-684, March 1975.In Japanese.

Commercial arbitrationArbitrage commercialToproBbifl apOHTpa/KArbitraje comercial

Bôckstiegel, K. H. Besondere Problème der Schiedsgerichtsbarkeit zwischen Privatunternehmenund auslàndischen Staaten oder Staatsunternehmen. Neue Juristische Wochenschrift (Berlin)28:1577-1582, 1975,

228

David, René. L'obligation pour les arbitres de statuer en droit dans les arbitrages du commerceinternational. In Popovici, Adrian. Problèmes de droit contemporain; mélanges Louis Bau-douin. Montréal, Presses de l'Université de Montréal, 1974, p. 305-318.

Ditchev, A. S. La constitution de l'arbitrage commercial international. Sotsialistichesko pravo(Sofia) :37-45, 1974, n° 7.

Domke, Martin. Dispute settlement by multinational companies. Journal of international law andeconomics (Washington, D.C.)10:291-295, August-September 1975.

Eisemann, Frédéric. Le nouveau règlement d'arbitrage de la Chambre de commerce internationale.Droit et pratique du commerce international (Paris)!: 355-365, septembre 1975.

Franchi, G. Criteri di decisione arbitrale e arbitrate internazionale. Archivio giuridico "FilippoSerafini" (Modena)l 86:117-126, 1974, no. 1-2.

Gaja, G. Sul procedimento per riconoscere e rendere esecutive le sentenze arbitral! stranieresecondla la Convenzione di New York. Archivio giuridico "Filippo Serafini" (Modena)186:159-166, 1974, no. 1-2.

Gentinetta, Jôrg. Die lex fori internationaler Handelsschiedsgerichte. Bern, Stàmpfli, 1973, 511 p.Text partly in English, French and German.

Holtzmann, H. M. Arbitration: an indispensable aid to multinational enterprise. Journal of inter-national law and economics (Washington, D.C.)10:337-345, August-September 1975.

Holtzmann, H. M. et G. V. E. Bernini. Cas hypothétique pour l'illustration du recours à l'arbitrageen vue de suppléer aux lacunes des contrats commerciaux et internationaux à long terme. Revuede droit international et de droit comparé (Bruxelles)52:10-17, 1975, n° 1.

Hùlsen, Hans Viggo von. Die Gûltigkeit von internationalen Schiedsvereinbarungen nach Konven-tionsrecht; mit Hinweisen auf deutsches, franzôsisches, englisches und US-amerikanischesRecht. Berlin, J. Schweitzer Verlag, 1973, xxiii, 167 p.

International commercial arbitration. In International Law Association, Report of the 55th Con-ference held at New York, Aug. 21-26, 1972. London, 1974, p. 625-646.

Karmali, A. E. International commercial arbitration. Bombay, Tripathi, 1974, 408 p.

Kindt, John Warren. Foreign nation judgments; if state law provides for the enforceability offoreign judgments, the judgment is enforceable without determination of whether the arbitra-tion award on which it is based is independently enforceable under the Convention on theRecognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards. Georgia journal of internationaland comparative law (Athens, Ga.)5:264-276, winter 1975.

Lay ton, R. Arbitration in international commercial agreements; the noose draws tighter. Inter-national lawyer (Chicago)9:741-750, fall 1975.

Lebedev, S. N. International commercial arbitration. Arbitration journal (New York)30:59-73,March 1975.

Mirabito, A. J. United Nations Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of ForeignArbitral Awards, the first four years. Georgia journal of international and comparative law(Athens, Ga.)5:471-501, summer 1975.

Norberg, Charles R. Inter-American commercial arbitration revisited. Lawyer of the Americas(Coral Gables, Fla.)7:275-290, June 1975.

Nygh, P. E. The international recognition and enforcement of arbitral awards. In Symposium onprivate investments and international transactions in Asian and South Pacific countries,Sydney, 1974. Private investments and international transactions in Asia and South Pacificcountries. New York, M. Bender, 1975, p. 353-408.

Schmitthoff, C. M. International commercial arbitration. Dobbs Ferry, N.Y., Oceana, 1974, 1 v.

Stuyt, A. M. Misconceptions about international (commercial) arbitration. In Netherlands year-book of international law, v. 5,1974. Leiden, A. W. Sijthoff, 1975, p. 35-58.

Tiewul, S. Azadon and Francis A. Tsegah. Arbitration and the settlement of commercial disputes;a selective survey of African practice. International and comparative law quarterly (London)24:393^18, July 1975.

229

Tsegah, Francis A. andS. Azadon Tiewul. Arbitration and the settlement of commercial disputes;a selective survey of African practice. Journal of world trade law (London)9 : 378-397, July-August 1975.

Consular relationsRelations consulairesKoHcyjibcKHe CHOIUCHHHRelaciones consulares

Yokota, Kisaburo. International law consular relations. Tokyo, Yuhikaku, 1974, 609 p.In Japanese.

Definition of aggressionDéfinition de l'agression

Definition de la agresiôn

,Zi;oHCKoii £(. u E. CxaKyHOB. OnpefleneuHe arpeccnH — no6e,n,a flunjioMaTHH MHpa. CoeemcKoezocydapcmeo u npaeo (MocKBa) X° 7:10-25, 1975.

[The definition of aggression — Victory of peace diplomacy.]

OMammse, M. M. O6 onpeflejiemm nonarna arpeccHH. ITpaeoeedenue (Mocxsa) 19:119-125,an.— <j>eB. 1975, Ns 2.

• [Determination of notion of aggression.]

Diplomatic relationsRelations diplomatiques

Relaciones diplomaticas

ico, H. IT. u H. B. 3KflaHOB. ITpHHinin HenpHKOCHOBCHHOcTH AminoMaTHHecKoro arenxa.B KH.: COBCTCKHH eHceroflHHK MeMCflynapoflHoro npasa 1973. MocKBa, H3flaTera»cTBO Hayxa,1975, c. 190-202.

Summary in English.[Principle of immunity of diplomatic agent.]

BorflanoB, O. B. MMMynHTei npeflcxaBHTejiefi rocyâpciB npn OOH. B KH.: CoBeicKHo eaceroflHHKMeacflynapOflHoro npasa 1973. Mocxsa, HaflaiejubCTBo Hayxa, 1975. c. 135-148.

Summary in English.[Immunity of representatives of states at the United Nations.]

Paszkowski, M. The law on special missions. In Polish yearbook of international law, v. 6, 1974.Warsaw, Institute of Legal Sciences, Polish Academy of Sciences, 1975, p. 267-288.

Przetacznik, Franciszek. Les devoirs de l'agent diplomatique à l'égard de l'Etat accréditaire. Revuede droit international, de sciences diplomatiques et politiques (Genève)53: 291-319, octobre-décembre 1975.

Przetacznik, Franciszek. The protection of foreign officials in the United States Code. Internationallawyer (Chicago)9:121-142, January 1975.

Skubiszewski, Krzysztof. Ochrona dyplomatyczna obywateli. Panstwo iprawo (Warszawa)30:30-42, pazdziernik 1975.

DisarmamentDésarmementPasopyœeaneDesarme

Alexeyev, A. Disarmament talks at the 29th session of the UN General Assembly. Internationalaffairs (Moscow)no. 3:13-20, 1975.

230

Bauch, J. Fùnf Jahre KernwafFen-Sperrvertrag; die Genfer Uberprùfïmgskonferenz zum Vertragtiber die Nichtverbreitung von KernwafTen. Europa-Archiv (BonnpO: 606-616, 1975.

Bos, E. Developments in disarmament law. In Netherlands -yearbook of international law, v. 5,1974. Leiden, A. W. Sijthoff, 1975, p. 175-179.

, H. u A. KapeHHH. BasKHbift mar K noirnoMy aanpemenmo HcnuTanHH flflepnoro opyacna.CoeemcKoe zocydapcmeo u npaeo (MocKBa) 45:75-80, 1975, Ms 1.

[A significant step towards complete prohibition of nuclear weapons.]

Fahl, Gundolf. Internationales Recht der Riistungsbeschrânkung. [Berlin] Berlin Verlag [1975],1 v. (loose-leaf) maps.

Jaschinski, H. Neuartige chemische Kampfstoffe im Blickfeld des Vôlkerrechts. Berlin, Dunckerund Humblot, 1975, 165 p. (Schriften zum Volkerrecht, 40.)

Kapoor, S. K. The legality of nuclear testing ; the Pokharan explosion. Indian journal of internationallaw (New Delhi)14: 425-432, July-December 1974.

Keller, H. Anton [et al.]. The Nonproliferation Treaty in light of nuclear energy developments.Revue de droit international de sciences diplomatiques et politiques (Genève)53: 201-240,juillet-septembre 1975.

Kùhne, W. Das Volkerrecht und die militârische Nûtzung des Meeresbodens. Leyden, Sijthoff,1975, 182 p. (Atlantische Reihe, 8.)

Kurosawa, M. The verification of compliance with the treaty obligations on 'disarmament. Osakalaw review (Osaka)no. 96:157-234, 1975.

In Japanese.

Massai, Alessandro. Preparazione délia Conferenza per il riesame del Trattato sulla non-prolifera-zione nucleare. Comunità internazionale (Padova)30: 72-77, 1975, no. 1-2.

MejiKOB, F. M. K sonpocy o HOJIHOH aeMHJiHTapHsauHH Mopci<oro flua. B KH.: CoseTCKHtt eacero^HHKMe^flVHapoflHoro npasa 1973. MocKBa, MaflaieubCTBO Hayica, 1975, c. 216-234.

Summary in English.[On the question of full demilitarisation of the sea-bed.]

Multan, Wojciech. Idea stref bezatomowych. Sprawy miedzynarodowe (Warszawa)28 : 43-59,maj 1975.

[The idea of nuclear free zones.]

Proposals for a true comprehensive nuclear test ban treaty. Stanford law review (Stanford, Calif.)387-418, January 1975.

Radojkovic, M. International security and co-operation; the problem of disarmament. /«Interna-tional Law Association, Report of the 55th Conference held at New York, Aug. 21-26, 1972.London, 1974, p. 285-292.

Stanford, Joseph S. Nuclear assistance and co-operation agreements; some problems in the appli-cation of safeguards. Journal of international law and economics (Washington, D.C.)10:437-451, August-December 1975.

Sullivan, M. J. III. Conference at the crossroads; future prospects of the Committee on Disarma-ment. International organization (Madison, Wis.)29: 393-41 3, spring 1975. .

Tiewul, S. Azadon. International law and nuclear test explosions on the high seas. Cornell interna-tional law journal (Ithaca, N.Y.)8: 45-70, December 1974.

Tomilin, V. Nuclear-free zones; how to make them effective. International affairs (Moscow) : 66-72,August 1975.

Vaughan, James E. Nuclear diversion; an international problem in need of international solution.Atomic energy law journal (Boston)! 7:179-231, fall 1975.

231

Domestic jurisdictionCompétence nationaleHauHOHajibHan WPHCAKKUHH rocy/japcTBJurisdicciôn interna

Claude, TnisL. Jr. Domestic jurisdiction and colonialism. /«Kilson, M. L. New states in the modernworld. Cambridge, Mass., Harvard Univ. Press, 1975, p. 121-135.

Ouchakov, N. A. La compétence interne des Etats et la non-intervention dans le droit internationalcontemporain. In Recueil des cours de l'Académie de droit international de La Haye, 1974-1.Leyde, A. W. Sijthoff, 1975, p. 1-86.

Radoynov, P. Some methodological problems in the research of domestic jurisdiction of the stateaccording to the contemporary international law. Trudove po mezhdunarodno pravo (Sofia)2:41-63, 1974.

Environmental questionsQuestions relatives à l'environnementBonpocw OKpysKaiojifCH cpeuMCuestiones del medio ambiente

Amendola, Gianfranco and Peter H. Sand. Transnational environmental cooperation betweendifferent legal systems'in Europe. Earth law journal (Leyden)l :189-195, August 1975.

Summaries in Russian, French and Spanish.

Baldwin, Malcolm Forbes. Environmental impact statements: new legal technique for environ-mental protection. Earth law journal (Leyden)l : 15-28, February 1975.

Ballenegger, Jacques. La pollution en droit international; la responsabilité pour les dommagescausés par la pollution transfrontière. Genève, Librairie Droz, 1975, 268 p. (Travaux de droit,d'économie, de sociologie et de sciences politiques, 105.)

Bothe, Michael. Recht auf eine gesunde Umwelt. Zeitschrift fur aitslàndisches ôffentliches Rechtund Vôlkerrecht (Stuttgart)34:351-371, Juli 1974.

Summary in English.Brown, Brendan F. International environmental law and the natural law. In Deener, David R.

International law of environment. New Orleans, La., Pontchartrain Press, 1975, p. 1-16.

Conference on the United Nations of 1975. 6th, Sinaia, Romania, 1971. Sixth conference on theUnited Nations of the next decade. Muscatine, Iowa, Stanley Foundation, 1971, 24 p.

Conservation of the environment. In International Law Association, Report of the 55th Conferenceheld at New York, Aug. 21-26, 1972. London, 1974, p. 468-538.

Doud, Alden Lowell. The treaty approach to effective environmental controls. In Deener, David R.International law of environment. New Orleans, La., Pontchartrain Press, 1975, p. 91-99.

Dupuy, Pierre-Marie. Sur des tendances récentes dans le droit international de l'environnement. InAnnuaire français de droit international, v. 20, 1974. Paris, Centre national de la recherchescientifique, 1975, p. 815-829.

Fassi-Fihri, Mohamed. Vers une Convention internationale. In Annuaire de l'Association desauditeurs et anciens auditeurs de l'Académie de droit international de La Haye, v. 41, 1971.La Haye, Martinus Nijhoff, 1971, p. 94-98.

Gates, Margaret E. Note on the literature concerning the problems of the international environ-ment. In Deener, David R. International law of environment. New Orleans, La., Pontchar-train Press, 1975, p. 123-132.

Goldie, L. F. E. A general view of international environmental law; a survey of capabilities, trendsand limits. In Hague. Academy of International Law. La protection de l'environnement et ledroit international. Leiden, Sijthoff, 1975, p. 25-143.

Hague. Academy of International Law. La protection de l'environnement et le droit international,éd. par A. C. Kiss. Leiden, Sijthoff, 1975, 650 p.

232

Handl, G. Territorial sovereignty and the problem of transnational pollution. American journal ofinternational law (Washington, D.C.)69:50-76, January 1975.

Heilbrunn, Bernice. U.N.E.P. mandates: Stockholm recommendations, General Assembly resolu-tions and Governing Council decisions. Earth law journal (Leyden)l :161-166, May 1975.

Idabouk, Mohamed. Planification et environnement. In Annuaire de l'Association des auditeurs etanciens auditeurs de l'Académie de droit international de La Haye, v. 41, 1971. La Haye,Martinus Nijhoff, 1971, p. 30-34.

Kaiser, K. International dimensions of the environmental problem. Law and state (Tubingen)8:75-94, 1973.

Kiss, Alexandre Ch. Le droit international de l'environnement humain; Rapport de synthèse duXXIIIe Congrès de l'A. A. A., Rabat, 17-22 mai 1971. In Annuaire de l'Association desauditeurs et anciens auditeurs de l'Académie de droit international de La Haye, v. 41, 1971.La Haye, Martinus Nijhoff, 1971, p. 113-120.

Kiss, Alexandre Ch. Légal aspects of air pollution control. Earth law journal (Leyden)l :29-50,February 1975.

Summaries in Russian, French and Spanish.Kiss, Alexandre Ch. The problem of damage caused by supersonic flights. In Annuaire de l'Asso-

ciation des auditeurs et anciens auditeurs de l'Académie de droit international de La Haye,v. 41, 1971. La Haye, Martinus Nijhoff, 1971, p. 99-101.

Kiss, Alexandre Ch. Problèmes juridiques de la pollution de l'air. In Hague. Academy of Inter-national Law. La protection de l'environnement et le droit international. Leiden, Sijthoff,1975, p. 145-237.

Lammers, Johan G. International cooperation for the protection of the waters of the Rhine basinagainst pollution. In Netherlands yearbook of international law, v. 5, 1974. Leiden, A. W.Sijthoff, 1975, p. 59-110.

Lupan, E. Das Recht im Dienste des Umweltschutzes Studia Universitatis Babes-Bolyai, seriesiurisprudentia (Cluj, Romania)!9:51-71, 1974.

Nanda, Ved P. Establishment of international standards for transnational environmental injury.Iowa law review (Iowa City, Iowa)60:1089-1127, June 1975.

Nanda, Ved P. International environmental law; a new approach. Millenium; journal of inter-national studies (London)4:101-112, autumn 1975.

Nonnenmacher, Georges-Gilbert. De la pollution atomique. In Annuaire de l'Association desauditeurs et anciens auditeurs de l'Académie de droit international de La Haye, v. 41, 1971.La Haye, Martinus Nijhoff, 1971, p. 102-112.

Nonnenmacher, Georges-Gilbert. L'homme face à son environnement d'aujourd'hui et de demain.In Annuaire de l'Association des auditeurs et anciens auditeurs de l'Académie de droit inter-national de La Haye, v. 41, 1971. La Haye, Martinus Nijhoff, 1971, p. 9-18.

Panhuys, Jonkheer H. F. van. Une nouvelle tâche pour le droit international; la défense du milieuhumain. In Annuaire de l'Association des auditeurs et anciens auditeurs de l'Académie dedroit international de La Haye, v. 41, 1971. La Haye, Martinus Nijhoff, 1971, p. 19-29.

Reintanz, Gerhard. Weltraumrecht; Stand und Entwicklung. Neue Justiz (Berlin)28:167-171,Mârz 1974.

Rûster, Bernd. International protection of the environment; treaties and related documents.Comp. and edited by B. Ruster and B. Simma. Dobbs Ferry, N.Y., Oceana Publications,1975- , 2 v.

Saeki, T. A consideration of the Trail Smelter case. Chukyo Hogaku (Nagoya)9:41-62, December1974.

In Japanese.Schneider-Sawiris, S. Concept of compensation in the field of trade and environment. Georgia

journal of international and comparative law (Athens, Ga.)5:357-380, summer 1975.Schuster, P. F. Nuclear ship pollution; national and international regulation and liability. En-

vironmental law (Portland, Ore.)5:203-240, winter 1975.

233

Smith, G. P. Toward an international standard of environment. Pepperdine law review (Anaheim,Calif.)2:28-51,1974.

Starke, J. G. The Stockholm Conference of 1972 on the human environment. In Festschrift furHermann Jahrreiss zum 80. Geburtstag. Kôln [Institut fur Vôlkerrecht und auslândischesoffentlich.es Recht, Univ. zu Koln] 1974, p. 253-269.

Stern, E. M. Impact of pollution abatement laws on the international economy; an overview of thehydra. Law and policy in international business (Washington, D.C.)7:203-272, winter 1975.

Symonides, J. Protection de l'environnement humain au regard du droit international. In Polishyearbook of international law, v. 6,1974. Warsaw, Institute of Legal Sciences, Polish Academyof Sciences, 1975, p. 163-177.

Teclaff, Ludwik A. International environmental law. Edited by L. A. Teclaff [and] A. E. Utton.N.Y., Praeger [1975], 270 p. (Praeger special studies in international politics and government.)

Van Niekerk, B. van D. Ecological norm in law or the jurisprudence of the fight against pollution.South African law journal (Cape Town)92:78-89, February 1975.

Wàlde, Thomas W. Recht und Umweltschutz. Archiv des ôffentlichen Rechts (Tûbingen)99:585-627, Dezember 1974.

Wojciechowski, Henryk. Inwestycje zagraniczne a ochrona srodowiska. Sprawy miedzynaroaowe(Warszawa)28:97-103, maj 1975.

'• [Foreign investments and the protection of natural environment.]

FinancingFinancement

Financiaciôn

Bissell, Richard E. A note on the Chinese view of United Nations finances. American journal ofinternational-law (Washington, D.C.)69: 628-633, July 1975.

Friendly relations and co-operation among StatesRelations amicales et coopération entre les Etats/JpywecTBeHHbie OTHOUICHHH H corpy^HHHecTBoRelaciones de amistad y cooperaciôn entre los Estados

Arnopoulos, P. Consultation and conciliation. International journal (Toronto)30:102-126, winter1974-1975.

Flory, Maurice. Souveraineté des Etats et coopération pour le développement. In Recueil des coursde l'Académie de droit international de La Haye, 1974-1. Leyde, A. W. Sijthoff, 1975, p. 255-330.

Glaser, Edwin. Dreptul statelor de a participa in conditii de egalitate la via{a internaîonala.Studii si cercetâri jitridice (Bucuresti)19:233-243, 1974, no. 2.

[Le droit des Etats de participer en des conditions d'égalité à la vie internationale.]

Kimminich, Otto. Vôlkerrechtliche Problème der Sicherheit und Zusammenarbeit. In Jahrbuchfur internationales Recht, v. 17, 1974. Berlin, Duncker und Humblot, 1975, p. 59-86.

Klein, R. A. Sovereign equality among states; the history of an idea. Toronto, Univ. of TorontoPress, 1974, 198 p.

Lachs, M. Some reflections on the settlement of international disputes. In Proceedings of theAmerican Society of International Law at its 68th meeting, 1974. Washington, D.C., 1974,p. 323-331.

JleBHH, J\. E. Mnpnoe paapenienHe MejKflynapOAHBix cnopos H nonarae cnpaBCAJiHsocra Coeem-CKoe zocydapcmeo u npaeo (MocKBa) JV° 10:94-100, 1975.

[The peaceful settlement of international disputes and the conception of justice.]

234

Munkman, A. L. W. Adjudication and adjustment; international judicial decision and the settle-ment of territorial and boundary disputes. In British yearbook of international law, v. 46,1972-73. London, Oxford U.P., 1975, p. 1-116.

Popescu, Dumitra. United Nations and regional organizations as instruments of conciliation.Revue roumaine de sciences sociales; série de sciences juridiques (Bucarest)19:169-182, 1975,n°2.

Touret, Denis. Le principe de l'égalité de droits des peuples et de leur droit à disposer d'eux-mêmes.Revue de droit international, de sciences diplomatiques et politiques (Genève)53:241-271,octobre-décembre 1975.

Waart, P. J. I. M. de. The element of negotiation in the Pacific settlement of disputes betweenstates. The Hague, Nijhoff, 1973, 229 p.

Human rightsDroits de l'hommeIlpasa HCJioBCKaDerechos humanos

Amnesty International. L'emprisonnement politique. Luxembourg [1975], 1 v. (various pagings.)

Amnesty International. Quinto Congreso de las Naciones Unidas sobre Prevenciôn del Delito yTratamiento del Delincuente, Toronto, 1-15 de sept, de 1975; propuestas presentadas porAmnistia Internacional. [London, 1975], 17 p.

Amnesty International. Report on torture. [2. éd., rev.] N.Y., Farrar, Straus and Giroux [1975],282 p.

Badawi, Ibrahim AH. The International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of RacialDiscrimination; a case study in the efforts of United Nations in the field of human rights.[N.Y., The author, 1975], 108 p.

Thesis. St. John's University, N.Y. Dept. of Government and Politics, 1975.Burrell, Garland E. Mental privacy; an international safeguard to governmental intrusions into the

mental processes. California Western international law journal (San Diego, Calif.)6:110-128,winter 1975.

Carrillo Salcedo, J. A. El derecho' al desarrollo como derecho de la persona humana. Revistaespanola de derecho internacional (Madrid)25:119-125, 1972, no. 1--4.

Cassese, Antonio. The new United Nations procedure for handling gross violations of humanrights. Comunità internazionale (Padova)30:49-61, 1975, no. 1-2.

Choe, Chang-Hwa. Nationality and human rights. Tokyo, Sakai Shoten, 1975, 357 p.In Japanese.

Daes, E.-I. A. Protection of minorities under the International Bill of Human Rights and theGenocide Convention. In Caemmerer, Ernst von [et al.]. Festschrift fur Pan J. Zepos anlâsslichseines 65. Geburtstages am 1. Dezember 1973. Athen, Freiburg, 1973, p. 35-86.

Dolan, Jo Ann and Maria Laetitia van den Assum. Torture and the 5i:h UN Congress on crimeprevention. International Commission of Jurists review (Geneva)no. 14:55-67, June 1975.

Domb, Fania. Who is a "victim" of a violation of human rights? In Israel yearbook on humanrights, v. 5, 1975. Tel Aviv, Faculty of Law, Tel Aviv University, 1975, p. 181-201.

Eggleston, E. M. Prospects for United Nations protection of the human rights of the indigenousminorities. In Australian yearbook of international law, 1970/73. Sydney, Butterworths,1975, p. 68-74.

Elles, D. L. Aliens and activities of the United Nations in the field of human rights. Revue des droitsde Vhomme (Paris)7:291-320, 1974.

Ermacora, F. Procedure to deal with human rights violations; a hopeful start in the UnitedNations? Revue des droits de Vhomme (Paris)7:670-689, 1974.

235

Galey, Margaret E. Indigenous peoples, international consciousness raising and the developmentof international law on human rights. Revue des droits de l'homme (Paris)8:21-39, 1975, n° 1.

Goose, P. E. Internationaler Pakt ùber bùrgerliche und politische Redite. Nette Juristische Wochen-schrift (Berlin)27:1305-1310, Juli 1974.

Haksar, U. Minority protection and International Bill of Human Rights. Bombay, Allied Pub-lishers, 1974, 181 p.

Hendry, J. McL. Ethics, values and the common good as guidelines for a world community.Ottawa law review (Ottawa)?:330-383, spring 1975.

Hondius, Frits W. Environment and human rights. In Annuaire de l'Association des auditeurs etanciens auditeurs de l'Académie de droit international de La Haye, v. 41, 1971. La Haye,Martinus Nijhoff, 1971, p. 68-79.

Human rights. In International Law Association, Report of the 55th Conference held at NewYork, August 21-26, 1972. London, 1974, p. 539-624.

Humphrey, John P. The revolution in the international law of human rights. Human rights (Dallas,Tex.)4:205-216, spring 1975.

International responsibility for treatment of criminal aliens. University of San Fernando Valleylaw review (Sepulveda, Calif.)3:115-125, 1974.

Ireland, Patricia. International protection of human rights. Lawyer of the Americas (Coral Gables,Fla.)7:318-336, June 1975.

KapTauiHH, B. A. HeKOToptie acneKTbi fleflTejibHOCTH OOH no 6opb6e npoTHB pactnMa. B KH.:COBCTCKHH eaceroAHHK MOKflynapOflHoro npasa 1973. Moacsa, HaflaxejibCTBO Hayxa, 1975,c. 163-174.

Summary in English.[Some aspects of UN activities to fight against racism.]

Liskofsky, Sidney. Coping with the "question of the violation of human rights and fundamentalfreedoms". Revue des droits de Vhomrne (Paris) 8:883-914, 1975, n° 4.

Highlights of 31st session of the United Nations Commission on Human Rights (Geneva,February 3-March 7, 1975).

Marie, J. B. La Commission des droits de l'homme de l'O.N.U. Paris, Pedone, 1975, 352 p.

Marks, Stephen. La notion de période d'exception en matière des droits de l'homme. Revue desdroits de l'homme (Paris)8:821-858, 1975, n° 4.

Miller, R. United Nations fact-finding missions in the field of human rights. In Australian yearbookof international law, 1970/73. Sydney, Butterworths, 1975, p. 40-50.

Modinos, P. Dialogue avec les droits de l'homme. Revue des droits de l'homme (Paris)8:631-636,1975, (numéro spécial).

Modinos, P. Droits de l'homme; notes et observations. Revue des droits de l'homme (Paris)8:659-675, 1975, (numéro spécial).

Modinos, P. Droits de l'homme ou la recherche d'une éthique. Revue des droits de l'homme (Paris)8:637-647, 1975, (numéro spécial).

Modinos, P. Introduction à l'étude des droits de l'homme. Revue des droits de l'homme (Paris)8:648-658, 1975, (numéro spécial).

Moskowitz, Moses. International concern with human rights. Leiden, Sijthoff, 1974, 239 p.

Mower, A. G. Jr. The effectiveness of an international human rights program. International organi-zation (Madison, Wis.)29:545-556, spring 1975.

Niset, José. Conceptions soviétiques en matière de droits de l'homme. Studia diplomatica (Bruxelles)28:253-284, 1975, n° 3.

Nomura, Keizo. Regional and collective ouaraotee of fundamental human rights. Tokyo, Kyoto,Yushingo, 1975, 537 p.

In Japanese.

236

Obieta Chalbaud, J. A. El derecho internacional de la persona humana. Bilbao, Mensajero, 1974,582 p. (Institute de dcrechos del hombre y de los grupos humnnos, 2.)

Prasad, M. The role of non-governmental organizations in the new United Nations procedures forhuman right§_complaints. Denver journal of international law and policy (Denver, Colo.)5:441-462, fall 1975.

Preliminary survey of action to further human rights in the Asian region specifically by the UnitedNations through its programme of advisory services in the field of human rights. In Australianyearbook of international law, v. 51, 1970-1973. Sydney, Butterworths, 1975, p. 51-67.

The protection of respect and human rights; freedom of choice and world public order, by M. S.McDougal et al. American University law review (Washington, D.C.)24: 919-1 086, 1975.

Ramcharan, B. G. The International Law Commission and human rights. Revue des droits del'homme (Paris)8:9-20, 1975, n° 1.

Regout, A. Individueel verweer in het kader van de UNO-rassendiscriminatieconventie. Rechts-kundig PF<?dtô/orf(Antwerp)38: 1033-1 052, 1974.

Saario, Voitto. Nordic initiatives in the field of human rights in the United Nations and otherinternational organizations. Revue des droits de l'homme (Paris)8: 95-101, 1975, n° 1.

Schroth, Peter W. and Virginia S. Mueller. Racial discrimination; thé United States and thé inter-national convention. Human rights (Dallas, Tex.)4:171-203, spring 1975.

Schwelb, E. United Nations, the Council of Europe and human rights; some observations. Revuedes droits de l'homme (Paris)8: 505-526, 1975.

Su, C.-Y.-s. A study of the protection of human rights. Chung hsing law review (Taipei)8: 43-76,1973.

In Chinese.

Szabo, I. Avenir des droits de l'homme. Revue des droits de l'homme (Paris)8: 587-603, 1975.

Tiewul, S. A. Apartheid; steps toward international legal control. Zarnbian law journal (Lusaka)6:101-127, 1974.

Tomko, J. Apartheid; medzihârodny zlocin proti l'udstvu. Prâvny obzor (Bratislava)58: 289-304,1975, no. 4.

Tomuschat, Christian. Der Schutz der Familie durch die Vereinlen Nationen. Archiv des ôffentlichen

Rechts (Tûbingen)100:402-415, September 1975.

BapHH, B. O. YBaJKeHHe K npasaM nejioBCKa — MOK/iyHapOAHbifi 3aKOH. B KH.: CoBeTCKiïiîHHK M«K,ayHapoflHoro npaea 1973. MocKea, Hsâie/ibCTBO Hayica, 1975, c. 175-189.

Summary in English.[Respect for human rights in international law.]

Vasak, K. Dimensions internationales des droits de l'homme; perspectives d'avenir. Revue desdroits de l'homme (Paris)8: 605-622, 1975, (numéro spécial).

Veiter, T. Commentary on the concept of national minorities. Revue des droits de l'homme (Paris)7:273-290, 1974.

Vukas, Budislav. General international law and the protection of minorities. Revue des droits def homme (Paris)8: 41-49, 1975, n° 1.

Weis, P. The denunciation of human rights treaties. Revue des droits de l'homme (Paris)8 : 3-7,1975, n° 1.

Wooldridge, F. W. and V. D. Sharma. International law and the expulsion of Ugandan Asians.International lawyer (Chicago)9 : 30-76, January 1975.

Zayas, A. M. de. International law and mass population transfers. Harvard international lawjournal (Cambridge, Mass.)l 6: 207-258, spring 1975.

237

International criminal lawDroit pénal internationalMew^yHapOAHoe yrojioBHoe npasoDerecho pénal internacional

Bassiouni, M. C. Appraisal of the growth and developing trends' of international criminal law.Revue internationale de droit pénal (Paris)45:405-433, 1974.

Castel, J. G. and M. Edwardh. Political offences; extradition and deportation. Osgoode Hall lawjournal (Downsview, Ontario)13:89-148, 1975.

Chen, Y.-c. Recent trends in the law of extradition. Hogaku kyokai (Tokyo)91:107-144, 253-292,1974.

In Japanese.

Dinstein, Yoram. International criminal law. In Israel yearbook on human rights, v. 5, 1975. TelAviv, Faculty of Law, Tel Aviv University, 1975, p. 55-87.

Forte, J. C. Principios sobre extradition. Justicia (Mexico City)33:31-42,1975, no. 540.

Garcia Rendôn, G. Légitima defensa en el derecho penal internacional. Revista de jurisprudenciaperuana (Lima)34:674-685, Julio 1975.

Knypl, Z. Ekstradycja jako instytucja prawa miedzynarodowego i wewnetrznego. Warszawa,Wydawn pravnicze, 1975, 202 p.

Kos-Rabcewicz-Zubkowski, L. Problem ustanowienia Miedzynarodowego Trybunatu Karuego.Palestra (Warszawa)18:113-118, aprile 1974.

[Problem of the foundation of an International Penal Tribunal.]

Liebscher, V. Neue Struktur des Internationalen Strafrechtes (62 bis 67 StGB). Juristische Blatter(Wien)96:393-402, 1974.

Moussa, Amre. The question of war crimes in the United Nations. In Revue égyptienne de droitinternational, v. 30,1974. Le Caire, Société égyptienne de droit international, 1974, p. 91-97.

Oehler, D. Internationales Strafrecht. Kôln, Heymann, 1973, 655 p.

Orie, A. M. M. Kaleidoskoop van het internationale Strafrecht. Delikt en Delinkwent (Leyten)4:403-408, Oktober 1974.

Phillips, L. H. Jr. Proposal for alternative jurisdiction of an international criminal court. Inter-national lawyer (Chicago)9:327-331, April 1975.

Piombo, H. D. Extradition de nacionales. Buenos Aires, Depalma, 1974, 295 p.

Pisapia, D. Extradition y genocidio. Revista mexicana de derecho penal (Mexico):45-52, 1974,no. 12.

PoMauiKHH, II. C. MeacflynapoflHoe yrojioBHoe npaso Ha cny)K6e MHpa H fleMoicparaH. CoeemcKoezocydapcmeo u npaeo (MocKBa) 45:69-76, 1975, JV° 5.

[International criminal law—used for peace and democracy.]

Schlochauer, H.-J. Entwicklung des vôlkerrechtlichen Deliktsrechts. Archiv des Volkerrechts(Tubingen)l 6:239-277, 1975.

Shearer, I. A. Extradition without treaty. Australian law journal (Sydney)49:l 16-122, 1975.

Trêves, T. La giurisdizione nel diritto pénale internazionale. Padova, CEDAM, 1973, 317 p. (Studie pubblicazioni della Rivista di diritto internazionale private e processuale, 6.)

United States and the 1948 Genocide Convention. Harvard international law journal (Cambridge,Mass.)16:683-704, summer 1975.

Wright, Q. Scope of international criminal law; a conceptual framework. Virginia journal of inter-national law (Charlottesville, Va.)l5:561-577, spring 1975.

t238 :s :-

International economic lawDroit économique internationalMttKAvnapOAHoe 3KOHOMHnecKoe npaaoDerecho econômico internacional

Biocca, S. M. Sociedades extranacionales y multinacionales. Buenos Aires, Zavalia, 1974,142 p.Brower, Charles N. and John B. Tepe, Jr. The Charter of Economie Rights and Duties of States;

a reflection or rejection of international law. International lawyer (Washington, D.C.)9:295—318, April 1975.

Brykman, Georges. Les entreprises multinationales ; une composante nouvelle du droit internationalpublic. Socialisme (Bruxelles)22:245-249, juin 1975.

Caicedo Castilla, J. J. Sociedades, empresas multinacionales, transnacionales. Academia Colom-biana de Jurisprudent, revista (Bogotà)no. 208-209:99-122, 1975.

Carroll, Mitchell B. UN proposals for the regulation of transnational corporations. N.Y. [1975],48 p. (Présidents Association. Special study, 59..)

Castaneda, J. et M. Virally. La Charte des droits et des devoirs économiques des Etats. In Annuairefrançais de droit international, v. 20,1974. Paris, Centre national de la recherche scientifique,1975, p. 31-77.

Dunning, J. H. Multinational enterprises; market structure, economic power, and industrialpolicy. Journal of world trade law (London)8: 575-613, November-December 1974.

Feuer, Guy. Réflexions sur la Charte des droits et devoirs économiques des Etats. Revue généralede droit international public (Paris)79:273-320, avril-juin 1975.

Fischer, Peter. Multinational Unternehmen und das Vôlkerrecht. Vereinten Natlonen undÔsterreich(Wien)23:24-29, 1974, no. 4.

Francioni, F. Compensation for nationalisation of foreign property; the borderland between lawand equity. International and comparative law quarterly (London)24:255-283, April 1975.

Ghobashy, O. Z. The changing attitudes in the world oil community. Syracuse journal of interna-tional law and commerce (Syracuse, N.Y.)2:287-298, fall 1974.

Grewlich, K. W. Problème der Direktinvestitionen sogennanter multinationaler Unternehmen.Aussenwirtschaftsdienst des Betriebs-Beraters (Heidelberg)20:365-371, Juli 1974.

Haight, G. W. The new international economic order and the Charter of economic rights and dutiesof states. International lawyer (Chicago)9 : 591-6O4, fall 1975.

Heiss, F. L. Zum Problem der Aufteilung von Aufwendungen multinationaler Uternehmen. Rechtder internationalen Wirtschaft (Heidelberg)21:332-338, Juni 1975.

Irie, Keishiro. Nationalization in developing countries. Tokyo, Waseda University, Institute ofComparative Law, 1974, 299 p.

In Japanese.Irie, Keishiro. Settlement of reparation and compensation in international law. Tokyo, Seibundo,

1974, 553 p.In Japanese.

Journée d'études juridiques Jean Dabin, 7e, Université de Louvain, 1973. Le contrat économiqueinternational. Bruxelles, Bruylant, 1975, 586 p. (Bibliothèque de la Faculté de droit de l'Uni-versité catholique de Louvain, 9.)

Katzenbach, Nicholas de B. Law-making for multinational corporations. In World Order StudiesProgram. Occasional paper, no. 1. Princeton, N.J., Center of International Studies, WoodrowWilson School of Public and International Studies, Princeton University, 1975, p. 25-32.

Keohane, R. O. andV. D. Ooms. The multinational firm and international regulation. Internationalorganization (Madison, Wis.)29:169-209, winter 1975.

Kitagawa, Tokusuke. A basic approach to international investment; exportation.of know-howsand arbitration. Kokusaiho gaiko zasshi (Tokyo)72:499-534, February 1974.

In Japanese. Summary in English.

239

Kukulka, J. Nowy typ wspolpracy miedzynarodowej. Sprawy miedzynarodowe (Warszawa)no. 7-8:7-21, 1975.

[The new type of international co-operation.]

Le Fera, S. La estructura juridica de la empresa multinational. Revista del derecho comercial y delas obligaciones (Buenos Aires)7:397-413, 1974.

Leitolf, Andréas. International law and the new world economic system. Review of internationalaffairs (Belgrade)26:23-28, 5 December 1975.

Lozada, Salvador Maria. Las corporaciones multinationales en el desarrollo mundial; un informede las Naciones Unidas. Buenos Aires, Editorial El Coloquio [1974], 257 p.

MacLaren, Roy. A code of conduct for multinationals. International perspectives (Ottawa): 21-24,May-June 1974.

Mielke, S. Multinationale Konzerne; zur Deformation pluralistischer Système. In Klassenjustizund Pluralismus. Festschrift fur Ernst Fraenkel zum 75. Geburtstag am 26. Dezember 1973.Hamburg 1973, p. 362-377.

Mining the resources of the third world; from concession agreements to service contracts, byHaliburton Fales II et al. In Proceedings of the American Society of International Law at its67th meeting, 1973. Washington, D.C., 1973, p. 227-245.

Moisuc, Constantin. The contribution of international organizations to the establishment of a newworld economic order. Revue roumaine d'études internationales (Bucarest)9:119-137, 1975,n°2.

Orrego Vicuna, Francisco. Derecho internacional econômico; selection de F. Orrego Vicuna.Mexico [1974], 2 v. (Fondo de Cultura Econômica, Mexico. Lecturas, 10.)

V. 1 : America Latina y la clâusula de la nation mas favorecida; una perspectiva latino-americana.

V. 2: Las nuevas estructuras del comercio internacional.

Peters, J. Irwin. The new economic charter of the United Nations. Columbia journal of worldbusiness (New York)10:lll-117, fall 1975.

Picciotto, Sol. The international firm, international law and the nation-state. Eastern Africa lawreview (Dar-es-Salaam)6:l-13,1973, no. 1.

Rangarajan, S. The structure of and legal control over multinational corporations. Indian journalof international law (New Delhi)! 5:453-484, October-December 1975.

Rao, P. Chandrasekhara. Charter of economic rights and duties of states. Indian journal of inter-national law (New Delhi)15:351-370, July-September 1975.

Salem, Mahmoud. Vers un nouvel ordre économique international. A propos des travaux de lasixième session extraordinaire des Nations Unies. Journal du droit international (Paris)102:753-800, octobre-novembre-décembre 1975.

Seidl-Hohenveldern, I. "Charta" der wirtschaftlichen Rechte und Pflichten der Staaten. Recht derinternationalen Wirtschaft (Heidelberg)21:237-239, Mai 1975.

Seidl-Hohenveldern, I. Multinational enterprises and the international law of the future. InYearbook of world affairs, v. 29, 1975. London, Stevens and Sons, 1975, p. 301-312.

Seynes, P. de. United Nations study of the multinational corporations. Nordisk tidsskrift forinternational ret (K0benhavn)44:9-16, 1975.

Spandau, A. Nationalism and the multinational enterprise. South African law journal (CapeTown)92:422-432, November 1975.

Tiewul, S. Azadon. The United Nations Charter of Economic Rights and Duties of States. Journalof international law and economics (Washington, D.C.)10:645-688, August-September 1975.

Tindall, R. E. Multinational enterprises. Dobbs Ferry, N.Y., Oceana, 1975, 371 p.

Vojnovic, Milan. Medunarodna zajednica i multinacional ne kompanije. Medunarodni problem!(Beograd)26:123-133, 1974, no. 2.

[International community and the multinational corporations.!

240

Wang, Nian Tzu. The design of an international code of conduct for transnational corporations.Journal of international law and economics (Washington, D.C.)10:3 L9-336, August-September1975.

Weston, Burns H. "Constructive takings" under international law: a modest foray into the prob-lem of "creeping expropriation". Virginia journal of international law (Charlottesville, Va.)16:103-175, fall 1975.

White, R. C. A. New international economic order. International and comparative law quarterly(London)24:542-552, July 1975.

International terrorismTerrorisme international

Terrorisme international

, H. IT. « H. B. 3K«aHOB. MeayryHapOAHO-npaBOBaa 6opt(ia c TeppopmMOM. Upaeo-eedenue (MocKsa) 19:85-94, HH.— 4>eB. 1975, Jfe 1.

[International law against terrorism.]

Bloomfield, L. M. Crimes against internationally protected persons; prevention and punishment;an analysis of the UN Convention [by] L. M. Bloomfield [and] G. F. Fitzgerald. N.Y.,Praeger [1975], xviii, 272 p. (Praeger special studies in international politics and government.)

Costello, Declan. International terrorism and the development of the principle out dedere outjudicare. Journal of international law and economics (Washington, D.C.)1 0:483-501, August-September 1975.

Hyams, Edward. Terrorists and terrorism. London, J. M. Dent and Sons [1975], 200 p.

Kawakami, S. Abduction in international law. Hogaku shimpo (Tokyo)81 :25-56, October 1974.In Japanese.

Kegley, C. W. Jr. Measuring the growth and decay of transnational norms relevant to the controlof violence. Denver journal of international law and policy (Denver, Colo.)5: 425-439, fall 1975.

Lee, Edward G. and Serge April. Behind-the-scenes negotiation of treaty to protect diplomats.International perspectives (Ottawa) : 3— 7, May— June 1975.

Mathews, A. S. Terrors of terrorism. South African law journal (Cape Town)91 : 381-388, August1974.

Milte, Kerry L. Prevention of terrorism through the development of supra-national criminology.Journal of international law and economics (Washington, D.C.)10: 519-538, August-December1975.

Murphy, J. F. International legal controls of international terrorism; performance and prospects.Illinois Bar journal (Springfield, 111. )63: 444-452, April 1975.

Panzera, Antonio Filippo. La Convenzione sulla prevenzione e la repressione di reati contro per-sone che godono di protezione internazionale. Rivista di diritto imernazionale (Milano)58 : 80-94, 1975, no. 1.

Paust, J. J. Survey of possible legal responses to international terrorism; prevention, punishment,and cooperative action. Georgia journal of international and comparative law (Athens, Ga.)5:431-469, summer 1975.

The protection and inviolability of diplomatic agents and other persons entitled to special protectionunder international law. In Asian African Legal Consultative Committee. Report of the 14thsession held in New Delhi from 10 to 18 January 1973. New Delhi, 1973, p. 241-278.

Smart, I. M. H. The power of terror. International journal (Toronto):iO: 225-237, spring 1975.

241

International trade lawDroit commercial internationalIIpaBo MewayiiapoAHOH roproBJraDerecho mercantil internacional

Atiyah, P. S. The sale of goods. 5. ed. [London], Pitman [1975], xxxii, 358 p.

EypryneB, F. C. yHmJjHicainw B pawucax KOMHCCHH OOH no npasy MeacflynapoflHoii ToproBjraHOpM, peryjmpyiomHX BHCHIHIOIO xoproBJiK). B KH.: COBCTCKHÔ eaceroflHHK Meac^ynapo^Horonpasa 1973. MocKsa, HaflaiejibCTBo Hayica, 1975, c. 268-283.

Summary in English.[Unification of the rules of law governing international trade within the framework of the

UN Commission of International Trade Law.]

Cohn, E. J. Defence of uncertainty; a study in the interpretation of the Uniform Law on Inter-national Sales Act 1967. International and comparative law quarterly (London)23:520-538,July 1974.

Goldring, J. UNCITRAL revision of the Hague rules on bills of lading. In Meeting on internationaltrade law, Australian Academy of Science, Canberra, 1974. Papers and summary of discus-sions, p. 47-79.

Huang, S. A study on the revised draft of the uniform law on the international sale of goods. Seoullaw journal (Seoul)14:5-30, 1973, no. 2.

In Korean.

Jakubowsky, Jerzy. Konwencja ONZ dotyczaca przedawnienia roszczen z miedzynarodowejsprzedazy towarôw. Panstwo i prawo (Warszawa)30:17-29, styczen 1975.

Kikuchi, Tadashi. Research on a general theory of treaties of commerce and navigation. Meijohogaku (Nagoya)24:l-77, 1975.

Kimball, J. D. Shipowner's liability and the proposed revision of the Hague Rules. Journal ofmaritime law and commerce (Washington, D.C.)7:217-252, October 1975.

Landfermann, Hans-Georg. Das Uncitral-Obereinkommen uber die Verjàhrung beim inter-nationalen Warenkauf. Rabels Zeitschrift fur. auslàndisches und internationales Privatrecht(Hamburg)39:253-277, 1975, no. 2.

Summary in English.[The Uncitral Convention on the limitation period in the international sale of goods.]

The law relating to international sale of goods. In Asian African Legal Consultative Committee.Report of the 14th session held in New Delhi from 10 to 18 January 1973. New Delhi, 1973,p. 109-240.

Michida, S. Draft convention on prescription (limitation) in the international sale of goods.Hogaku ronso (Kyoto)94:71-119,1974, no. 5-6.

In Japanese.

Popov, L. La nécessité de réclamation portant vices rédhibitoires dans les ventes internationales demarchandises. Trudove po mezhdunarodno pravo (Sofia)2:97-116, 1974.

Rigaux, F. Le domaine d'application de la loi uniforme sur la vente internationale des objetsmobiliers corporels et de la loi uniforme sur la formation de ces contrats de vente. In Journéed'études juridiques Jean Dabin, 7e, Université de Louvain, 1973. Le contrat économiqueinternational. Bruxelles, Bruylant, 1975, p. 67-113.

Smit, H. Convention on thé limitation period in the international sale of goods; UNCITRAL'sfirst-born. American journal of comparative law (Berkeley, Calif.)23:337-362, spring 1975.

Sono, K. Unification of limitation period in the international sale of goods. Louisiana law review(Baton Rouge, La.)35:l 127-1149, 1975.

Sweeney, J. C. UNCITRAL draft convention on carriage of goods by sea, part I. Journal of mari-time law and commerce (Washington, D.C.)7:69-125, October 1975.

United Nations Commission on International Trade Law, 1973-4. Journal of world trade law(London)9:209-221, March-April 1975.

242

White, H. S. Convention on the uniform law of international bills of exchange and internationalpromissory notes; a comparison to the uniform commercial code. Georgia journal of interna-tional and comparative law (Athens, Ga.)5: 21 6-247, 1975, no. 2.

Witte-Wegmann, G. Vereinheitlichtes matérielles Recht fur den internationalen Kauf. JuristischeRundschau (Berlin): 49-52, Februar 1975.

International waterwaysVoies d'eau internationales

Vias navegables internacionales

Al-Khirp, Ezzedine A. The Euphrates in the international law. Cairo, Egyptian Society of Inter-national Law, 1975, 77 p.

Resume of thesis. Cairo. University. Faculty of Law, 1975.

Brownell, Herbert and Samuel D. Eaton. The Colorado River salinity problem with Mexico.American journal of international law (Washington, D.C.)69: 255-271, April 1975.

Bulson, M. E. Colorado river salinity problem; has a solution been found? International lawyer(Chicago)9: 283-294, April 1975.

.Cabrera, Luis. Use of the waters of the Colorado River in Mexico; pertinent technical commen-taries. Natural resources journal (Albuquerque, N. Mex.)15:26-34, January 1975.

Cundick, R. Palmer. International straits; the right of access. Georgia journal of international andcomparative law (Athens, Georgia)5:.107-140, 1975, no. 1.

Fleischer, Carl August. International straits; a key issue at the Law of the Sea Conference. Environ-mental policy and law (Lausanne)! :120-126, December 1975.

Gaja, Giorgio. River pollution in international law. In Hague. Academy of International Law. Laprotection de l'environnement et le droit international. Leiden, Sijthoff, 1975, p. 353-396.

Giuliano, Mario. The regime of straits in general international law. IK Italian yearbook of inter-national law, v. 1, 1975. Napoli, Editoriale Scientifica, 1975, p. 16-26.

Grandison, W. G. andV. J. Meyer. International straits, global communications, and the evolvinglaw of the sea. Vanderbilt journal of transnational law (Nashville, Tenn.)8 : 393-449, spring 1975.

Holburt, Myron B. International problems of the Colorado River. Natural resources journal(Albuquerque, N. Mex.)15:ll-26, January 1975.

Holstein, Thomas O'Connell. State responsibility and the law of international watercourses.Lawyer of the Americas (Coral Gables, Fla.)7: 535-555, October 1975.

International water resources law. In International Law Association, Report of the 55th Con-ference held at New York, Aug. 21-26, 1972. London, 1974, p. 22-106.

Kearney, Richard D. Non-navigational uses of international watercourses. Brooklyn journal ofinternational law (Brooklyn, N.Y.)1 :1-17, spring 1975.

Kuribayashi, Tadao. The regime of passage through international straits. Hogaku kenkyu (Tokyo)48:331-365, April 1975; 48:429-453, May 1975.

In Japanese.

The law relating to international rivers. In Asian African Legal Consultative Committee. Reportof the 14th session held in New Delhi from 10 to 18 January 1973. New Delhi, 1973, p. 89-107.

McNees, Richard B. Freedom of transit through international straits. Journal of maritime law andcommerce (Silver Spring, Md.)6: 175-211, January 1975.

Menon, P. K. Water resources development of international rivers with special reference to thedeveloping world. International lawyer (Washington, D.C.)9: 441-464, July 1975.

Momtaz, Djamchid. La question des détroits à la troisième Conférence du droit de la mer. InAnnuaire français de droit international, v. 20, 1974. Paris, Centre national de la recherchescientifique, 1975, p. 841-859.

243

Momtaz, Djamchid. Le régime de la navigation dans le Canal de Suez. Revue iranienne des relationsinternationales (Téhéran)4:155-167, automne 1975.

Pernthaler, P. [and] F. Esterbauer. Uber die Durchfùhrung der Rheinregulierungsvertrâge in derinnerstaatlichen Rechtsordnung. Juristische Blatter (Wien)97:301-306, 1975.

Revillard, Mariel. Les fleuves internationaux. In Annuaire de l'Association des auditeurs et anciensauditeurs de l'Académie de droit international de La Haye, v. 41, 1971. La Haye, MartinusNijhoff, 1971, p. 41-54.

Shyam, M. International straits and ocean law. Indian journal of international law (New Delhi).15:17-46, January-March 1975.

Simpson, Michael D. Panama; the proposed transfer of the Canal and Canal Zone by treaty.Georgia journal of international and comparative law (Athens, Georgia)5:195-215, 1975, no. 1.

Symonides, Janusz. Freedom of navigation in international straits. Studies on international relations[Polish Institute of International Affairs] (Warsaw)no. 6:76-87, 1975.

Symonides, Janusz. Swoboda zeglugi w ciesninach morskich. Sprawy miedzynarodowe (Warszawa)28:49-61, kwiecien 1975.

[Freedom of navigation in sea straits.]Vitânyi, Bêla. The regime of navigation on international waterways. Part II: The territorial scope

of the regime of free navigation. In Netherlands yearbook of international law, v. 6, 1975.Leiden, A. W. Sijthoff, 1975, p. 3-58.

InterventionInterventionErneuiaTejibCTBOIntervention

Black, C. E. The relevance of theories of modernization for normative and institutional efforts atthe control of intervention. In Moore, J. N. Law and civil war in the modern world. Baltimore,Md., Johns Hopkins Univ. Press, 1974, p. 53-69.

Bowett, D. W. The interrelation of theories of intervention and self-defense. In Moore, J. N. Lawand civil war in the modern world. Baltimore, Md., Johns Hopkins Univ. Press, 1974, p. 38-50.

Brownlie, I. Humanitarian intervention. In Moore, J. N. Law and civil war in the modern world.Baltimore, Md., Johns Hopkins Univ. Press, 1974, p. 217-228.

Ehrlich, T. Legal process in foreign affairs: military intervention; a testing case. Stanford law review(Stanford, Calif.)27:637-652, February 1975.

Farer, Tom J. The regulation of foreign intervention in civil armed conflict. In Recueil des cours del'Académie de droit international de La Haye, 1974-11. Leyde, A. W. Sijthoff, 1975, p. 291-406.

Fonteyne, J.-P. L. Customary international law doctrine of humanitarian intervention; its currentvalidity under the U.N. Charter. California Western international law journal (San Diego,Calif.)4:203-270, spring 1974.

Gun, T. R. The relevance of theories of internal violence for the control of intervention. In Moore,J. N. Law and civil war in the modern world. Baltimore, Md., Johns Hopkins Univ. Press,1974, p. 70-91.

Lillich, R. B. Humanitarian intervention; a reply to Dr. Brownlie and a plea for constructive alter-natives. In Moore, J. N. Law and civil war in the modern world. Baltimore, Md., JohnsHopkins Univ. Press, 1974, p. 229-251.

Little, Richard. Intervention; external involvement in civil wars. Totowa, N.J., Rowman andLittlefield [1975], 236 p.

Matsuda, Takeo. On so-called humanitarian intervention. Kokusaiho gaiko zasshi (Tokyo)73:553-605, April 1975.


244

Moore, J. N. Toward an applied theory for the regulation of intervention. In Moore, J. N. Lawand civil war in the modern world. Baltimore, Md., Johns Hopkins Univ. Press, 1974, p. 3-37.

Rosenau, J. N. Foreign intervention as adaptive behavior. In Moore, J. N. Law and civil war in themodern world. Baltimore, Md., Johns Hopkins Univ. Press, 1974, p. 129-151.

Young, O. R. Systemic bases of intervention. In Moore, J. N. Law and civil war in the modernworld. Baltimore, Md., Johns Hopkins Univ. Press, 1974, p. 111-126.

Law of the seaDroit de la merMopcKoe npaaoDerecho del mar

Adam, P. Economie consequences of extending fisheries jurisdiction. In Pontecorvo, Giulio.Fisheries conflicts in the North Atlantic. Cambridge, Mass., Ballinger, 1974, p. 135-146.

Adede, A. O. Settlement of disputes arising under the Law of the Sea Convention. American journalof international law (Washington, D.C.)69:798-818, October 1975.

Adede, A. O. The system for exploitation of the "Common heritage of mankind" at the CaracasConference. American journal of international law (Washington, D.C.)69:31-49, January 1975.

Ady, Clemens E. The oceans; Law of the Sea Conference, Geneva. Lawyer of the Americas (CoralGables, Fla.)7:477-485, June 1975.

Alexander, Lewis M. and Robert D. Hodgson. The impact of the 200-mile economic zone on thelaw of the sea. San Diego law review (San Diego, Calif.)!2:569-599, April 1975.

Alverson, D. L. Management of the ocean's living resources. Ocean development and internationallaw journal (New York)3:99-125, 1975, no. 2.

Amerasinghe, C. F. Basic principles relating to the international regime of the oceans at the Caracassession of the U.N. Law of the Sea Conference. Journal of maritime law and commerce (SilverSpring, Md.)6:213-248, January 1975.

American Society of International Law. Working Group on technical issues of the law of the sea.Policy issues in ocean law. St. Paul, West, 1975,189 p. (Studies in transnational legal policy, 8.)

Angrand, Jean. Les ressources minérales du fond des mers et le droit international. Perspectivesinternationales (Ottawa):51-55, juillet-août 1975.

Aramburu Menchaca, Andrés A. Historia de las 200 millas de mar territorial. Piura, Universidadesde Piura, 1973, 117 p. (Colecciôn Algarrobo, 12.)

Aramburu Menchaca, Andrés A. La reforma del derecho del mar. Lima [The author], 1975, 50 p.

Armstrong, Robert G., William M. Franz and Webster B. Kinnaird. Recent developments in thelaw of the sea; a synopsis. San Diego law review (San Diego, Calif.)!2:665-699, April 1975.•,

Arnold, Rudolph Preston. Common heritage of mankind as a legal concept. International lawyer(Chicago)9:153-158, January 1975.

Auger, Robert. Le texte unique de négociation laisse-t-il entrevoir une solution finale ? Perspectivesinternationales (Ottawa):40-47, juillet-août 1975.

Concerning the 3rd UN Law of the Sea Conference. .Barrie, G. N. International enforcement of conventions on fisheries;. Tydskrif vir Hedendaagse

Romeins-Hollandse Reg (Amsterdam)38:140-152, mei 1975.Beurier, Jean-Pierre, et Patrick Cadenat. La traduction de l'intérêt économique dans le droit de la

mer. Earth law journal (Leyden)l:115-132, May 1975.Summaries in French and Spanish.

Beurier, Jean-Pierre et Patrick Cadenat. Les résultats de la Conférence de Genève sur le droit de lamer. Revue générale de droit international public (Paris)79:750-762, juillet-septembre 1975.

Biggs, G. Deepsea's adventures; Grotius revisited. International lawyer (Chicago)9:271-281,April 1975.

245

Pobrow, D. B. International politics and high-level decision making; context for ocean policy.Ocean development and international law journal (New York) : 171-180, 1975, no. 2.

Bosco, Giorgio. Verso la terza conferenza delle Nazioni Unite sul diritto del mare. In Annuariodi diritto comparato e di studi legislativi, v. 46, 1975. Roma, Institute Italiano di StudiLegislativi, 1975. p. 76-96.

Burke, William T. Contemporary law of the sea; transportation, communication and flight.Kingston, R.I., 1975, 38 p. (Law of the Sea Institute, Kingston, R.I. Occasional paper, 28.)

Burke, William T. National and international law enforcement in the ocean [by] W. T. Burke,P.. Legatski [and] W. W. Woodhead. Seattle, Washington U.P. [1975], 244 p.

Burke, William T. Scientific research articles in the law of the sea informal single negotiating text.Kingston, R.I., 1975, 16 p. (Law of the Sea Institute, Kingston, R.I. Occasional paper, 25.)

Buzan, Barry. Lav/ of the sea conference; the danger of delay. International perspectives (Ottawa):25-29, November-December 1974.

Buzan, Barry. Seabed issues at the Law of the Sea Conference; the Caracas session. In Canadianyearbook of international law, v. 12,1974. Vancouver, B.C., University of British Columbia,1974, p. 222-238.

Caminos, H. The law of the sea at the Caracas session. Columbia journal of transnational law (NewYork)14:80-86, 1975, no. 1.

Caracas, 1974; international regulation of ocean ecology. Golden Gate law review (San Francisco,Calif.)5:325-365, 1975.

Christy, Francis T. Jr. Law of the sea; Caracas and beyond. Proceedings of the ninth annualconference of the Law of the Sea Institute, January 6-9, 1975. Edited by F. T. Christy [andothers]. Cambridge, Mass., Ballinger Pub. Co., 1975, 422 p.

Christy, Francis T. Jr. Property rights in the world ocean. Natural resources journal (Albuquerque,N. Mex.)l5:695-712, October 1975.

Chwen, W. W. Fundamental problems for the exploitation and the use of deep seabed naturalresources in the international law. Chung hsing law review (Taipei)9:l-14, 1974.

In Chinese.

Clarkson, K. W. International law, U.S. seabeds policy and ocean resource development. Journalof law and economics (Chicago) 17:117-142, April 1974.

Cochran, Charles L. Caracas and beyond: negotiations on the law of the sea; final report for period1 July to 31 Dec. 1975. Prepared for Office of Support Technology, Naval Material Command[and] Energy-Environment Study Group, U.S. Naval Academy. [Washington, D.C.] 1975,24 p. (U.S. Naval Academy, Annapolis. USNA-EPRD, 8.)

Conference on the United Nations of 1975. 7th, South Egremont, Mass., 1972. Ocean managementand world order. Muscatine, Iowa, Stanley Foundation, 1972, 32 p.

Conforti, Benedetto. Does freedom of the seas still exist? In Italian yearbook of international law,v. 1, 1975. Napoli, Editoriale Scientifica, 1975, p. 3-15.

Cooper, R. N. An economist's view of the oceans. Journal of world trade law (London)9:357-377,July-August 1975.

Crauciuc, Olimpiu A. G. L'exploration et l'exploitation des ressources minérales marines, quelquesproblèmes juridiques et économiques. Revue roumaine des sciences sociales; série de sciencesjuridiques (Bucarest)19:211-221, 1975, n° 2.

Danzig, Aaron L. A funny thing happened to the common heritage on the way to the sea. SanDiego law review (San Diego, Calif.)12:655-664, April 1975.

Dar, V. and M. Levis. Effective communication in technology sharing. Ocean development andinternational law journal (New York)2:379-401, winter 1974.

Deep-sea mining. In International Law Association, Report of the 55th Conference held at NewYork, Aug. 21-26, 1972. London, 1974, p. 379-467.

Defensor Santiago, Miriam. The archipelago concept in the law of the sea. Philippine law journal(Quezon City)49:315-386, July 1974.

246

Delupis, Ingrid. Land-locked states and the law of the sea. In Scandinavian studies in law, v. 19,1975. Stockholm, Almqvist and Wiksell International, 1975, p. 101-120.

Dubner, B. H. A proposal for accommodating the interests of archipelagic and maritime states.New York University journal of international law and politics (New York)8:39-61, spring 1975.

Eckert, R. D. Exploitation of deep ocean minerals; regulatory mechanisms and United Statespolicy. Journal of law and economics (Chicago)17:143-177, April 1974.

Ehmer, J. Der Grundsatz der Freiheit der Meere und das Verbot der Meeresverschmutzung.Berlin, Duncker und Humblot, 1974, 207 p. (Schriften zum Vôlkerrecht, 38.)

Eiriksson, Gudmundur. The Third United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea; an assess-ment. Columbia journal of world business (New York)l 0:15-19, spring 1975.

Ely, Northcutt and Robert F. Pietrowski Jr. Boundaries of seabed jurisdiction off the Pacific coastof Asia. Natural resources lawyer (Chicago)S:611-629, 1975, no. 4.

Emanuelli, C. C. Canadian approach to the Third Law of the Sea Conference. University of NewBrunswick law journal (Fredericton, N.B.)24:3-28, May 1975.

Establishment of international fisheries claims boards for the resolution of fishery-related disputes;their implementation, procedures and effectiveness. American University law review (Washing-ton, D.C.)24:1333-1371, summer 1975.

Fawcett, James E. S. Problème des Seerechts; Ausblick auf die Konferenz von Caracas. Europa-Archiv (Bonn)29:365-372, 1974, no. 11.

Finlay, L. W. Realism vs. idealism as the key to the determination of the limits of national juris-diction over the continental shelf. In Yates, G. T. Ill and J. H. Young. Limits to nationaljurisdiction over the sea. Charlottesville, Va., Virginia Univ. Press, 1974, p. 75-99.

Franck, T. M. andE. R. Chesler. International régime for the sea-bed beyond national jurisdiction.Osgoode Hall law journal (Downsview, Ontario)! 3:579-601, 1975.

Gajic, Dusan. Ill Kinferencija UN o pravu mora. Mudunarodni problemi (Beograd)28 :141-162,1975, no. 1.

Gastines, Louis de. La mer patrimoniale. Revue générale de droit international public (Paris)79:447-457, avril-juin 1975.

Gold, Edgar. The Third United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea; the Caracas Session,1974. Maritime studies and management (Bristol, England)2:102-109, October 1974.

Goldie, L. F. E. Delimiting continental shelf boundaries. In Yates, G. T. Ill and J. H. Young.Limits to national jurisdiction over the sea. Charlottesville, Va., Virginia Univ. Press, 1974,p. 3-74.

Corner, Gunter und Harry Wunsche. Entwicklungstendenzen bei der Kodifizierung des See-volkerrechts. NeueJustiz (Berlin)29:673-676, 1975, no. 23.

Govindraj, V. C. Land-locked states; their right to the resources of the sea-bed and the ocean floor.Indian journal of international law (New Delhi)14:409-424, July-December 1974.

FypecB, C. A. Toprosoe cyaoxoflCTBo H MOKAynapoAHoe MopCKoe npaso. CoeemcKoe eocydapcmeou npaeo (MocKBa) No. 3:94-99, 1975.

[Merchant navigation and international sea law.]Hardy, M. Decision making at the Law of the Sea Conference. Revue belge de droit international

(Bruxelles)ll :442-474, 1975, n° 2.Hardy, M. Regional approaches to law of the sea problems ; the European Community. Inter-

national and comparative law quarterly (London)24:336-348, April 1975.Hargrove, John Lawrence. Who protects the ocean; environment of the law of the sea [by] M. O.

Clement [and others]. Edited by J. L. Hargrove. St. Paul, Minn., West Pub. Co. [1975], 250 p.Hershman, M. J. and J. C. Folkenroth. Coastal zone management and intergovernmental coordina-

tion. Oregon law review (Eugene, Ore.)54:13-33, 1975.Hoeffel, Jean-Marc. La zone maritime péruvienne de "souveraineté et de juridiction nationales"

(le Pérou et les 200 milles). Revue générale de droit international public (Paris)79:422-446,avril-juin 1975.

247

Hollick, A. L. LOS III; prospects and problems. Columbia journal of transnational law (New York)14:102-111, 1975, no. 1.

Hollick, A. L. National ocean institutions; research needs. Ocean development and international lawjournal (New York)3: 155-1 70, 1975, no. 2.

Hollick, A. L. United States and Canadian policy processes in law of the sea. San Diego law review(San Diego, Calif.)12: 518-552, April 1975.

, B. MHPOBOÎÎ OKeaH H MeayryHapoflHoe npaso. MeMcdynapodnaa Mcu3Hb (MocKsa).No 1:72-83, 1975.

Ibler, Vladimir. Rjesavanje sporova i buduca konvencija o pravu mora. Medunarodni problemi(Beograd)27: 61-83, 1975, no. 2.

[Settlement of disputes and the future convention on the law of the sea.]

Integrative potential of the proposed international regime for the seabed. Iowa law review (IowaCity, Iowa)60:148-173, October 1974.

Ito, F. The thought of Hugo Grotius in the Mare liberum. In Japanese annual of international law,no. 18, 1974. Tokyo, The International Law Association of Japan, 1974, p. 1-15.

Jackson, H. M. Rational development Of outer continental shelf oil and gas. Oregon law review(Eugene, Ore.)54: 567-581, 1975.

Jacobs, M. J. United States participation in international fisheries agreements. Journal of maritimelaw and commerce (Silver Spring, Md.)6: 47 1-529, July 1975.

Jados, Stanley S. Consulate of the sea and related documents. University, Alabama Univ. Press,1975, 326 p.

Janis, Mark W. The roles of regional law of the sea. San Diego law review (San Diego, Calif.)12:553-568, April 1975.

Jenisch, Uwe. Nuclear tests and freedom of the seas. In Jahrbuch fur internationales Recht, v. 17,1974. Gôttinger, Vandenhoeck und Reprecht, 1974, p. 177-194.

Jenisch, Uwe. Tendenzen im internationalen Seerecht; post Caracas 1974. Europa-Archiv (Bonn)29:799-808, 1974, no. 23.

Johnston, D. M. The economic zone in North America. Ocean development and international lawjournal (New York)3: 53-68, 1975, no. 1.

Johnston, D. M. The regional consequences of a global fisheries convention. In Pontecorvo,Giulio. Fisheries conflicts in the North Atlantic. Cambridge, Mass., Ballinger, 1974, p. 35-51.

Joyner, Christopher C. International law of the sea and the future of deep seabed mining; proceed-ings of the John Bassett Moore Society of International Law Symposium and the AmericanSociety of International Law Regional Meeting, Charlottesville, Va., Nov. 16, 1974. Editedby C. C. Joyner. Charlottesville, Va., Accent Printing Co. [1975], 112 p.

Joyner, Christopher C. Towards a legal régime for the international seabed; the Soviet Union'sevolving perspective. Virginia journal of international law (Charlottesville, Va.)15:871-901,summer 1075.

Joyner, Nancy Douglas. Maintaining the quality of fisheries on the high seas. In Deener, David R.International law of environment. New Orleans, La., Pontchartrain Press, 1975, p. 47-55.

Kalinkin, G. F. Problems of legal regulation of seabed uses beyond the limits of the continentalshelf. Ocean development and international law journal (New York)3: 127-1 53, 1975, no. 2.

Knight, H. Gary. The future of international fisheries management [by] L. G. Anderson [andothers]. Edited by H. G. Knight. St. Paul, Minn., West Pub. Co. [1975], 253 p.

Knight, H. Gary. Jurisdictional issues in ocean management. Columbia journal of world business(New York)10:5-14, spring 1975.

Knight, H. Gary. The law of the sea; cases, documents, and readings. Washington, D.C., NautilusPress, 1975- , 1 v. (loose-leaf)

Kury, Channing. The fisheries proposals; an assessment. San Diego law review (San Diego, Calif.)12:644-654, April 1975.

248

Langavant, E. L'océanologie. Droit maritime français (Paris)323:643-660, novembre 1975.

Lapidoth, R. Freedom of navigation; its legal history and its normative basis. Journal of maritimelaw and commerce (Washington, D.C.)6:259-272, January 1975.

Law of the sea: from Caracas to Geneva; a time for decision. Columbia journal of transnational law(New York)14:l-117, 1975, no. 1.

The law of the sea. In Asian African Legal Consultative Committee. Report of the 14th session heldin New Delhi from 10 to 18 January 1973. New Delhi, 1973, p. 25-87.

Lawrence, W. H. Superports, airports and other fixed installations on the high seas. Journal ofmaritime law and commerce (Silver Spring, Md.)6:575-591, July 1975.

Lazarev, M. I. Scientific-technological progress and the search for legal regulation of possible sea-bed uses. Ocean development and international law journal (New York)3:75-86, 1975, no. 1.

Levy, Jean-Pierre. Vers un nouveau droit de la mer : la politisation du processus de création juri-dique. Revue générale de droit international public (Paris)79:897-931, octobre-décembre 1975.

Levy-Morelle, J. L'île artificielle de Zeebrugge et le droit international. Revue belge de droit inter-national (Bruxelles)]. 1:161-174, 1975, n° 1.

Linares, A. Problemas de la plataforma continental. Boletin de la Facultad de Derecho y CienciasSociales (Côrdoba, Argentina)37:305-349, enero-diciembre 1973.

Lomhoff, P. G. Dementia piscatoria-sanitas Malta; the international sea service. Ecology lawquarterly (Berkeley, Calif.)4:319-341, 1974, no. 2.

Lôpez Villamil, H. La delimitaciôn y explotaciôn de los espacios marines y oceânicos. Revistaespanola de derecho internacional (Madrid)26-27:89-109, 1974.

L0vald, Johan Ludvik. In search of an ocean regime; the negotiations in the General Assembly'sSeabed Committee 1968-1970. International organization (Madison, Wis.)29:681-709,summer 1975.

McWhinney, Edward. The codifying conference as an instrument of international law-making:from the "old" law of the sea to the "new". Syracuse journal of international law and commerce(Syracuse, N.Y.)3:301-318, fall 1975.

Maechling, C. Jr. Freedom of scientific research; stepchild of the oceans. Virginia journal of inter-national law (Charlottesville, Va.)l 5:539-559, spring 1975.

Maidment, Susan. Historical aspects of the doctrine of hot pursuit. In British yearbook of inter-national law, v. 46, 1972-73. London, Oxford U.P., 1975, p. 365-381.

Mare nostrum, vostrum et clausum; jurisdiction over sea, seabed and subsoil. University of SanFernando Valley law review (Sepulveda, Calif.)4:131-145, spring 1975.

Mariani, G. C. Le droit de la mer à la veille de la troisième Conférence des Nations Unies. Nice,Institut de la paix et du développement, Univ. de Nice, 1974, 49 p. (Centre national pourl'exploitation des océans. Rapports économiques et juridiques,, 1.)

Marine Technology Society. Law of the sea briefing; reflections on the Caracas session of theUnited Nations Law of the Sea Conference. [Kingston, R.I., 1974], 47 p. (Law of the SeaInstitute, Kingston, R.I. Occasional paper, 24.)

Briefing held Sept. 26,1974, and co-sponsored by the Marine Technology Society and theLaw of the Sea Institute.

Marston, Geoffrey. Low-tide elevations and straight baselines. In British yearbook of internationallaw, v. 46, 1972-73. London, Oxford U.P., 1975, p. 405-423. '

Martin, C. Newfoundland's case on offshore minerals; a brief outline. Ottawa law review (Ottawa)7:34-61, winter 1975.

Martin, H. J. Die wirtschaftliche Nutzung mariner Ressourcen nach dem neuen Meeresvôlkerrecht.Recht der internationalen Wirtschaft (Heidelberg)21:240-246, 1975.

Martin, H. J. Umwelt und Recht; das neue Seevolkerrecht. Neue juristische Wochenschrift (Berlin)28:722-726, 1975.

249

Martinez, A. D. Third United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea; prospects, expectations,and realities. Journal of maritime law and commerce (Washington, D.C.)7:253-274, October1975.

Mensbrugghe, Yves van der. Het internationaal zeerecht tussen Caracas en Genève. RechîskundigWeekblad (Antwerp)38:I281-1300, 1975.

Mensbrugghe, Yves van der. Le pouvoir de police des Etats en haute mer. Revue belge de droitinternational (Bruxd\es)l 1:56-102, 1975, n° 1.

Meseguer Sanchez, J. L. Vers un nouveau régime international des entreprises communes de pêche.In Annuaire français de droit international, v. 20,1974. Paris, Centre national de la recherchescientifique, 1975, p. 860-874.

Mille, Milenko. Common heritage of mankind; working paper of the World Peace through LawCenter, to be delivered at the Law of the Sea Conference, Geneva, 1975 [Geneva, 1975], 24 p.

Miljan, T. Mare clausum Balticum and the law of the sea. Osteuropa Recht (Stuttgart)21:103-118,1975.

Mircea, Tudor. La Conférence de l'O.N.U. sur le droit de la mer. Revue roumaine d'études inter-nationales (Bucarest)9:21-34, 1975, n° 1.

Miyamoto, Seishiro. The law of the sea and Japanese shipping. Kokusai mondai (Tokyo)no. 184:33-42, July 1975.

In Japanese.

Morales, Paul. El régimen de la alta mar. In Orrego Vicuna, F. Tendencias del derecho del marcontemporâneo. Buenos Aires, El Ateneo, 1974, p. 115-143.

Morris, R. B. Forging of the union reconsidered; a historical refutation of state sovereignty overseabeds. Columbia law review (New York)74:1056-1093, October 1974.

Nakamura, K. Exploitation of sea resources and the United Nations; problems in retrospect andprospects for a third conference on the law of the sea. Journal of international law and diplomacy[Kokusaiho gaiko zasshi] (Tokyo)69:684-715, March 1975.


Nelson, L. D. M. Patrimonial sea. Comparative juridical review (Coral Gables, Fla.)12:49-90,1975.In English and Spanish.

Nye, J. C. Ocean rule making from a world politics perspective. Ocean development and internationallaw journal (New York)3:29-52, 1975, no. 1.

O'Connor, Dennis M. An anonymous draft treaty on the law of the sea. [Editor: D. M. O'Connor.]Prepared for National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. [Springfield, Va.] 1975,126 p. (Miami, University of, Coral Gables, Fla. Sea Grant Program. Sea Grant technicalbulletin, 29.)

Oda, Shigeru. The Caracas Session of the Third Law of the Sea Conference. Journal of internationallaw and diplomacy [Kokusaiho gaiko zasshi] (Tokyo)73:l-35, February 1975.

Text in Japanese. Summary in English.

Oda, Shigeru. The international law of the ocean development; basic documents. Vol. 2. Leiden,Sijthoff, 1975, 638 p.

Oda, Shigeru. A study on the law of the sea. Tokyo, Yuhikaku, 1975, 304 p.In Japanese.

Oelofsen, P. D. Third United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea—passage through straitsused for international navigation. Comparative and international law journal of Southern Africa(Pretoria)8:367-378, November 1975.

Ogley, Roderick. Whose common heritage? Creating a law for the seabed. [London, FrancesPinter, 1975], 48 p.

Only, D. Christopher. International seabed resources; the U.S. position. Virginia journal of inter'national law (Charlottesville, Va.)l5:903-925, summer 1975.

250

Ohmachi, Hokuichiro. The law of the sea and Japanese exploitation of mineral resources of the sea.Kokusai mondai (Tokyo)no. 184:26-32, July 1975.

In Japanese. 'Okuhara, Toshio. The concept of exclusive economic zone. Selkei ronso (Tokyo)21:273-307,

November 1974.In Japanese.

Orlin, H. Offshore boundaries; engineering and economic aspects. Ocean development and inter-national law journal (New York)3:87-96, 1975, no. 1.

Orrego Vicuna, Francisco. Latin American policies on the law of the sea; the prospects of a worldcompromise agreement. [Santiago] 1974,23 p. (Chile. University, Santiago. Departamento deEstudios Internacionales. Special publications series, 1.)

Orrego Vicuna, Francisco. El régimen de los fondes marinos y oceânicos. In Orrego Vicuna,Francisco. Tendencias del derecho del mar contemporaneo. Buenos Aires, El Atenco, 1974,p. 67-113.

Orrego Vicuna, Francisco. Tendencias del derecho del mar contemporaneo. Buenos Aires, ElAteneo, 1974, 236 p.

Osieke, E. The contribution of States from the Third World to the development of the law on thecontinental shelf and the concept of the economic zone. Indian journal of international law(New Delhi)! 5:313-332, July-September 1975.

Owada, Hisashi. The nature and the issues of the third Law of the Sea Conference. Kokusai mondai(Tokyo)no. 184:2-15, July 1975.

In Japanese.

Oxman, B. H. and M. B. West. Issues to be resolved in the second substantive session of the thirdUnited Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea. Columbia journal of transnational law (NewYork)14:87-101,1975, no. 1.

Ozaki, Shigeyoshi. Legal problems of the delimitation of the continental shelf. Reference (Tokyo)no. 281:53-79, June 1974; no. 283:69-84, August-1974; no. 284:39-69, September 1974.

In Japanese.

Pacem in Maribus Convocation, Malta, 1972. Pacem in maribus; proceedings. [Msida?] RoyalUniversity of Malta Press, 1973, 305 p.

Pacem in Maribus Convocation, Malta, 1973. Pacem in maribus;; proceedings edited by DavidKrieger. [Msida?] Royal University of Malta Press, 1974, 382 p.

Paolillo, F. H. El mar territorial y la zona contigua. In Orrego Vicuna, F. Tendencias del derecho delmar contemporaneo. Buenos Aires, El Ateneo, 1974, p. 1-38.

Papadakis, Nikos. Artificial islands in international law. Maritime studies and management(London)3:33-39, July 1975.

Pardo, Arvid. The New International Economic Order and the la:W of the sea, by A. Pardo andE. M. Borgese. [Valetta, 1975?], 223 p. (Malta. Royal University. International OceanInstitute. Occasional papers, 4.)

Park, Choon-Ho. The Sino-Japanese-Korean sea resources controversy and the hypothesis of a200-mile economic zone. Harvard international law journal (Cambridge, Mass.)16:27-46,winter 1975.

Pastor Ridruejo, José Antonio. La explotaciôn de los fondos marinos mas alla de la jurisdiccion.nacional. [Valladolid] 1975, 82 p. (Valladolid. Universidad. Câtedra "James Brown Scott".Cuadernos, 1975.)

Peyroux, E. La chasse à la baleine dans le droit international public actuel. Revue générale de droitinternational public (Paris)79:92-124, janvier-mars 1975.

Pisk, Zdenëk [and] Richard Krâl. K pripravë revize mezinàrodniho pràva morského. Mezinârodnîvztahy (Praha) 10:55-63, 1975, no. 5.

[On the preparation for the revision of the law of the sea.]

251

Platzôder, Renate. Die Dritte Seerechtskonferenz der Vereinten Nationen. In Jahrbuch fur inter-nationales Recht, v. 17, 1974. Gôttingen, Vandenhoeck und Reprecht, 1974, p. 195-224.

Platzôder, Renate [and] Wolfgang Graf Vitzthum. Wirtschaftszonen und Archipelstaaten. Ver'fassung und Recht in Ubersee (Hamburg)?:289-305, 1974, no. 3.

Summary in English.Pollard, Duke E. The exclusive economic zone; the elusive consensus. San Diego law review (San

Diego, Calif.)12:600-623, April 1975.Pontecorvo, G. Reflections on the economics of the common heritage of mankind; the organization

of the deep-sea mining industry and the expected benefits from resource exploitation. Oceandevelopment and international law (New York)2:203-216, fall 1974.

Pontecorvo, G. and M. Wilkinson. An economic analysis of the international transfer of marinetechnology. Ocean development and international law journal (New York)2:255-283, fall 1974.

Popiela, Wojciech. Nowe tendencje miedzynarodowego prawa morza a rybolowstwo dalekomor-skie. Sprawy miedzynarodowe (Warszawa)28:147-159, grudzien 1975.

[New tendencies in international law of the sea and deep sea fishing.]Quéneudec, Jean-Pierre. La zone économique. Revue générale de droit international public (Paris)

79:321-253, avril-juin 1975.Quéneudec, Jean-Pierre, Michel Levinet et Frédéric Sudre. Chronique du droit de la mer. In

Annuaire français de droit international, v. 20, 1974. Paris, Centre national de la recherchescientifique, p. 830-840.

Rajan, H. P. The 1973 draft articles on archipelagos by Fiji, Indonesia, Mauritius and the Philip-pines analysed. Indian journal of international law (New Delhi)14:230-244, April-June 1974.

Rao, P. Sreenivasa. The management of deep ocean resources. Indian journal of international law(New Delhi)!5:501-505, October-December 1975.

Rao, P. Sreenivasa. The public order of ocean resources; a critique of the contemporary law of thesea. Cambridge, Mass., MIT Press [1975], 313 p.

Bibliography: p. 275-302.

Rosenne, S. The concept of territorial sea in the Talmud. Israel law review (Tel Aviv)10:503-508,October 1975.

Ross, D. A. andL. J. Smith. Training and technical assistance in marine science; a viable transferproduct. Ocean development and international law journal (New York)2:219-253, fall 1974.

Rubin, K. A. The role of the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 in the development of oil andgas from the outer continental shelf. Natural resources lawyer (Chicago)8:399-436,1975, no. 3.

Ruda, José Maria. The outer limit of the continental shelf. In Rodley, Nigel S. International law inthe western hemisphere. The Hague, 1974, p. 38-69.

Ruster, B. Staaten- und Vertragspraxis zum Festlandsockel im sudasiatischen Raum. In Jahrbuchfur internationales Recht, v. 17, 1974. Gôttingen, Vandenhoeck und Reprecht, 1974, p. 225-252.

Rûster, B. Vertrâge und Deklarationen ûber dén Festlandsockel, Continental Shelf. Frankfurt amMain, Metzner, 1975,181 p. (Dokumente, 42.)

Scerni, M. La nuova problematica del diritto del mare. Comunitàinternazionale (Padova)30:251-260,1975.

Schram, G. G. The case for coastal state jurisdiction. In Pontecorvo, Giulio. Fisheries conflicts inthe North Atlantic. Cambridge, Mass., Ballinger, 1974, p. 105-115.

Also in Nordisk tidsskrift for international ret (K0benhavn)44:17-26,1974-1975, no. 1-4.

Schwarzkopf, H. Staatliche Informationspflichten im Seerecht. Berlin, Duncker und Humblot,1975,123 p. (Schriften zum Vôlkerrecht, 43.)

Seaton, E. E. Balancing of non-coastal and coastal fishing rights. In Pontecorvo, Giulio. Fisheriesconflicts in the North Atlantic. Cambridge, Mass., Ballinger, 1974, p. 117-134.

252

Seyersted, F. Jurisdiction de los organismes internacionales en alta mar. In Orrego Vicufia, F.Tendencias del derecho del mar contemporâneo. Buenos Aires, El Ateneo, 1974, p. 145-154.

Seyersted, F. El régimen de las pesquerias en alta mar. In Orrego Vicuna, F. Tendencias del derechodel. mar contemporâneo. Buenos Aires, El Ateneo, 1974, p. 39-65.

Sohn, Louis B. Settlement of disputes arising out of the law of the sea convention. San Diego tawreview (San Diego, Calif.)12:495-517, April 1975.

Soons, A. H. A. Artificial islands and installations in international law. Kingston, R.I., 1974,30 p. (Rhode Island. University. Law of the Sea Institute. Occasional paper series, 22.)

Staynov, Petko. Establishment of a special international statute of the semi-enclosed sea. InStudies in international law, v. 2, 1974. Sofia, Bulgarian Association of International Law,1974, p. 29-40.

Stevenson, John R. Law-making for the seas. In World Order Studies Program. Occasional paper,no. 1. Princeton, N.J., Center of International Studies, Woodrow Wilson School of Public and.International Studies, Princeton University, 1975, p. 41-53.

Also in American Bar Association journal (Chicago)61:185-190, February 1975.

Stevenson, John R. and Bernard H. Oxman. The Third United Nations Conference on the Law ofthe Sea; the 1974 Caracas session. American journal of international law (Washington, D.C.)69:1-30, January 1975.

Stevenson, John R. and Bernard H. Oxman. The third United Nations Conference on the Law ofthe Sea; the 1975 Geneva session. American journal of international law (Washington, D.C.)69:763-797, October 1975.

Sumi, Kazuo. The concept of the exclusive economic zone. Bulletin of Yokohama City University:social science (Yokohama)27:51-109, October 1975.

In Japanese.

Sweeney, R. J., R. D. Tollison andl. D. Willett. Market failure., the common-pool problem, andocean resource exploitation. Journal of law and economics (Chicago)! 7:179-192, April 1974.

Taft, G. The third U.N. Law of the Sea Conference; major unresolved fisheries issues. Columbiajournal of transnational law (New York)14:l 12-117, 1975, no. 1.

Takabayashi, Hideo. Search for a new order of the oceans. Kokusai mondai (Tokyo)no. 178:16—27,January 1975.

In Japanese.

Takabayashi, Hideo. Two hundred miles resources jurisdiction. Ryukoku hogaku (Kyoto)? :l-47,September 1974.

In Japanese.

Toward a model regional fisheries management regime. Universit v of Kansas Jaw review (Lawrence,Kan.)23:461-497, 1975.

Trabandt, Charles A. Intervention on the High Seas Act. Law and policy in international business(Washington, D.C.)7:303-319, winter 1975.

Transfer of marine science technology; quid pro quo for freedom of scientific research? San Diegolaw review (San Diego, Calif.)12:700-716, April 1975.

Trilateral Commission. Task Force on the Oceans. A new regime for the oceans; a report of theTrilateral Task Force on the Oceans to the Executive Committee of the Trilateral Commission.Rapporteurs: M. Hardy [and others]. Paris, 1975, 54 p. (Trilateral Commission. Trianglepapers, 9.)

Tsukada, Shiro. The law of the sea and Japanese fisheries. Kokusai mondai (Tokyo)no. 184:16-25,July 1975.

In Japanese.

253

United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea, 3rd, New York and Caracas, 1973-1974.Delegation from the United States. Report to the Senate, by C. Pell [et al.] Washington, D.C.,U.S. Govt. Print. Off., 1975,156 p.

U.S. Congress. Senate. Committee on Foreign Relations. The Third U.N. Law of the Sea Con-ference, Geneva session, Mar.-May 1975; report to the Senate by C. Pell [and others],Washington, 1975, 156 p. (U.S. 94. Cong., 1. sess. Committee print.)

U.S. General Accounting Office. Information on United States ocean interests together with posi-tions and results of Law of the Sea Conference at Caracas; report to the Congress by theComptroller General of the United States. [Washington, 1975], 72 p., maps.

Vargas Carreno, Edmundo. La solution de las controversias en el derecho del mar. [Santiago],1975, 27 p. (Chile. Universidad, Santiago. Departamento de Estudios Internacionales. Sériede publicaciones especiales, 3.)

Views in the Americas on basic questions relevant to the law of the sea discussion. Georgia journalof international and comparative law (Athens, Ga.)5:171-184, 1975, no. 1.

Vignes, Daniel. Organisation et règlement intérieur de la troisième Conférence sur le droit de lamer. Revue du droit public et de la science politique (Paris)2:337-377, mars-avril 1975.

Vignes, Daniel. Will the third Conference on the Law of the Sea work according to the consensusrule? American journal of international law (Washington, D.C.)69:119-129, January 1975.

Vitzthum, W. G. and R. Platzôder. Seerechtsreforrrt und Sicherheitspolitik. Neue Zeitschrift furWehrrecht (Berlin)16:81-95, 1974.

BHCOTCKHÔ, A. O. IIpasoBBie npoôJieMU CBo6o^M nayHHbix HCCJieflOBaHHft B MHPOBOM OKeane.KHCB, HayxoBa flyMica, 1974. 157 c.

Waggener, Susan L. The transfer of marine science technology; quid pro quo for freedom of scien-tific research? San Diego law review (San Diego, Calif.)!2:700-716, April 1975.

Wassermann, U. Prospect for sea-bed resources in a recession. Journal of world trade law (London)9:711-713, November-December 1975.

Weil, Jeffrey G. Law of the sea—exclusive economic zone—Iceland accorded preferential fishingrights in water adjacent to its coast; duty to negotiate imposed upon disputing parties to defineIceland's rights against the United Kingdom and its historic rights. Harvard international lawjournal (Cambridge, Mass.)l6:474-490, spring 1975.

Windeyer, V. Kenneth Bailey memorial lecture; the seabed in law. Federal law review (Canberra)6:1-25, 1974.

Wolf, Atwood C. The U.N. declaration of principles governing the deep sea-bed. In Rodley, NigelS. International law in the western hemisphere. The Hague, 1974, p. 70-87.

Zacklin, Ralph. El derecho del mar en evoluciôn; la contribuciôn de los paises americanos.[Compilador]: R. Zacklin. Mexico [1975], 316 p. (Fondo de Cultura Econômica, Mexico.Secciôn de obras de politica y derecho.)

Zuleta, Bernardo. Le droit de la mer; théories et notions nouvelles et d'avenir élaborées au coursdes huit dernières années. ONU chronique mensuelle (New York)12:50-53, août-sept. 1975.

Law of treatiesDroit des traitésITpaso floroBopOBDerecho de los tratados

Biscottini, G. Questioni vecchie e nuove in tema di ordine di esecuzione dei trattati. Rivista didiritto internazionale (Milano)57:204-237, 1974, no. 2.

Brazil, P. Some reflections on the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties. Federal law review(Canberra)6:223-248, June 1975.

Brosche, H. Zwang beim Abschluss vôlkerrechtlicher Vertrage. Berlin. Duncker und Humblot,1974, 250 p. (Schriften zum Vôlkerrecht, 35.)

254

Cahier, Philippe. Le problème des effets des traités à l'égard des Etats tiers. In Recueil des cours del'Académie de droit international de La Haye, 1974-III. Leyde, A. W. Sijthoff, 1975, p. 589-736.

Caicedo Castilla, J. J. La teoria dél jus cogens en derecho internacional a la luz de la Convenciônde Viena sobre el derecho de los tratados. Academia Colombiana de Jurisprudencia, revista(Bogotâ)no. 206-207:259-274, 1975.

David, A. E. The strategy of treaty termination; lawful breaches and retaliations. New Haven,Conn., Yale Univ. Press, 1975, 324 p.

Duckwitz, E. Rechtsfolgen bei Verletzung vôlkerrechtlicher Vertrâge, Berlin, Duncker und Hum-blot, 1975, 158 p. (Schriften zum Vôlkerrecht, 44.)

Espada Ramos, M. L. El Convenio de Viena sobre el derecho de los tratados. Granada, 1974,113 p. (Colecciôn monogrâfica Universidad de Granada, 26.)

Frankowska, M. La dénonciation du traité international à la lumière du droit interne. Studioprawnicze (Warszawa)42:179-217, 1974.

In Polish.

Hummer, Waldemar. Ordinary versus special meaning. Ôsterreichische Zeitschrift fur ôffentlichesRecht (Wien)26: 87-163, 1975, no. 1-2.

Jasudowicz, T. Zakaz wykonywania rasady rébus sic stantibus wumowach okreslajacych granice.Studio prawnicze (Warszawa)no.41:3-29, 1974.

[L'interdiction de l'application de la règle rébus sic slantibus envers les traités délimitantune frontière.]

Kyozuka, S. Relationship between the interpretation of treaties and the law creative function.Hogaku shimpo (Tokyo)81: 25-61, 1974, no. 1.

In Japanese. >Malawer, S. S. Coerced treaties and the Convention on the Law of Treaties. In his Studies in

international law. Washington, D.C., Lerner Law Book Co., 1974, p. 20-62.

Marchisio, Sergio. Sulla competenza del governo a stipulare in forma semplificata i trattati inter-nazionali. Rivista di diritto internazionale (Milano)58 : 533-556, 1 975, no. 3.

Molea, M. C. Vieille de consimtâmînt în dreptul international public. Bucure§ti, Editura, 1973, 224 p.

Ogawa, Yoshihiko. The law of treaties concerning the treaties concluded by international organi-zations. Journal of law and politics [Kwansei Gakuin University] (Nishinomiya)25 : 547-580,March 1975.

In Japanese.

Paolillo, Felipe H. Some general reflections on the acceptance of treaties as a means of expandingthe body of international law. Journal of international law and economics (Washington, D.C.)10:355-369, August-December 1975.

Pau, Giovanni. Note sull'esecuzione del trattati. Rivista di diritto internazionale (Milano)58 : 509-532, 1975, no. 3.

Rao, V. Nageswar. Jus cogens and the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties. Indian journalof international law (New Delhi)14: 362-385, July-December 1974.

Rozakis, C. L. Conditions of validity of international agreements. Revue hellénique de droit inter-national (Athènes)26-27: 221-253, 1973-1974.

fflecraKOB, JI. H. noiurnie HOPM jus cogens B COBPCMCHHOM MeamyHapoflHOM npaee. ITpaeoeedenue(MocKsa) 18:118-122, 1974, Jfc 6.

[On the notion of the norm jus cogens in modern international law.]

Simma, Bruno. Der Grundvertrag und das Recht der vôlkerrechtlichen Vertrâge. Archiv desb'ffentlichen Rechts (Tubingen) 100: 4-29, Mârz 1975.

255

Sladkowski, Jacek. Podleganie traktatôw prawu miedzynarodowemu. Sprawy miedzynarodowe(Warszawa)28:97-106, kwiecien 1975.

[Submission of treaties to international law.]

S0rensen, Max. Le problème dit du droit intertemporel dans l'ordre international. In Annuaire del'Institut de droit international, v. 55, 1973. Baie, Editions juridiques et sociologiques, 1973,p. 1-48.

Stauffer, Wilhelm. Internationales Vertragsrecht und Rechtsberufung im Prozess. SchweizerischeJuristen-Zeitung (Zùrich)70:181-185, 1974, no. 12.

Sztucki, J. Jus cogens and the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties. Wien, Springer, 1974,204 p. (Ôsterreichische Zeitschrift fur ôffentliches Recht. Supplementum, 3.)

Tenekidès, G. Les effets de la contrainte sur les traités à la lumière de la Convention de Viennedu 23 mai 1969. In Annuaire français de droit international, v. 20,1974. Paris, Centre nationalde la recherche scientifique, 1975, p. 79-102.

Vallat, Francis. The work of the International Law Commission—the law of treaties. Netherlandsinternational law review (Leyden)22:327-336, 1975, no. 3.

Wolfke, K. Jus cogens in international law. In Polish yearbook of international law, v. 6, 1974.Warsaw, Institute of Legal Sciences, Polish Academy of Sciences, 1975, p. 145-162.

Law of warDroit de la guerreIIpaBO BOHHblDerecho de la guerra

Baxter, Richard R. Humanitarian law or humanitarian politics? The 1974 Diplomatic Conferenceon Humanitarian Law. Harvard international law journal (Cambridge, Mass.)16:l-26, winter1975.

Baxter, Richard R. Some existing problems of humanitarian law. Revlie de droit pénal militaire etde droit de la guerre (Bruxelles) 14:297-303, 1975, n° 3-4.

Bond, J. E. Amended Article 1 of draft Protocol I to the 1949 Geneva Conventions; the coming ofage of the guerrilla. Washington and Lee law review (Lexington, Va.)32:65-78, winter 1975.

Bothe, Michael. Die Genfer Konferenz ùber humanitâres Vôlkerrecht; Bericht iiber den Stand derVerhandlungen nach der zweiten Sitzungsperiode. Zeitschrift fur auslândisches ôffentlichesRecht und Vôlkerrecht (Stuttgart)35:641-655, 1975, no. 3.

Cassese, Antonio. Current problems of international law; essays on U.N. law and on the law ofarmed conflict. Milano, Giuffrè, 1975, 375 p. (Pubblicazioni délia Facoltà di giurisprudenzadélia Università di Pisa, 60.)

Cassese, Antonio. Weapons causing unnecessary suffering; are they prohibited? Rivista di dirittointernazionale (Milano)58:12-42, 1975, no. 1.

Chimango, L. J. The relevance of humanitarian international law to the liberation struggles inSouthern Africa—the case of Moçambique in retrospect. Comparative and international lawjournal of Southern Africa (Pretoria)8:287-317, November 1975.

Dabrowa, S. Ludnosé cywilna w konfliktach zbrojnych. Warszawa, Wydawn. ministerstwa obronynarodowej, 1974, 367 p.

Delbruck, J. Die Adàquanz vôlkerrechtlicher Kriegsverhutungs- und Friedenssicherungsinstru-mente im Lichte der Kriegsursachenforschung. In Jahrbuch fur internationales Recht, v. 17,1974. Gôttingen, Vandenhoeck und Reprecht, 1974, p. 87-124.

Diplomatic Conference on the Reaffirmation and Development of International HumanitarianLaw Applicable in Armed Conflicts. 1st Session, Geneva, 1974. Documents. [English] Geneva1974-

256

Diplomatie Conference on the Reaffirmation and Development of International HumanitarianLaw Applicable in Armed Conflicts. 2nd Session, Geneva, 1975. Draft protocols I [and] II;following the second session of the Diplomatic Conference. Geneva, International Committeeof the Red Cross [1975], 2 v.

Also in French.

Diplomatic Conference on the Reaffirmation and Development of International Humanitarian"Law Applicable in Armed Conflicts. 2nd session, Geneva, 1975. Documents. [English]Geneva, 1975-

Duculesco, Victor. Effet de la reconnaissance de l'état de belligérance par les tiers, y compris lesorganisations internationales, sur le statut juridique des conflits armés à caractère non inter-national. Revue générale de droit international public (Paris)79:125-151, janvier-mars 1975.

Fleck, Dieter. Vôlkerrechtliche Gesichtspunkte fiir ein Verbot der Anwendung bestimmterKriegswaffen. In Fleck, Dieter. Beitràge zur Weiterentwicklung der humanitàren Volkerrechtsfur bewaffnete Konflikte. Hamburg, Hanischer Gildenverlag, 1973, p. 1-23.

Summaries in English and French.

Fontenot, Russell J. Development of the staff legal officer's responsibility under the law of war.Revue de droit pénal militaire et de droit de la guerre (Bruxelles)] 4:69-110, 1975, n° 1-2.

Summary in French.

Forsythe, David P. The 1974 Diplomatie Conference on Humanitarian Law; some observations.American journal of international law (Washington, D.C.)69:77-91, January 1975.

Fujita, Hisakazu. La guerre de libération nationale et le droit international humanitaire. Revue dedroit international, de sciences diplomatiques et politiques (Genève)53:81-142, avril-juin 1975.

Graham, D. E. 1974 Diplomatie Conference on the Law of War; a victory for political causes anda return to the "just war" concept of the eleventh century. Washington and Lee law review(Lexington, Va.)32:25-63, winter 1975.

Heidelmeyer, Wolfgang. Krieg und Nachkrieg; die UN-Grundsatze bei Kriegs- und Humanitâts-verbrechen. Vereinte Nationen (Bonn)22:176-179, Dezember 1974.

Heydte, F. A. von der. Die Auswirkungen der Resolutionen des Institut de Droit International imBereich des Kriegsrechts auf die Fortentwicklung des Kriegsvolkerrechts. In Wengler, W.Justitia et pace. Festschrift zum 100 jâhrigen Bestehens des Institut de Droit International.Berlin, Duncker und Humblot, 1974, p. 31-61.

Hugler, Oskar. Bemerkungen zur Diplomatenkonferenz uber das humanitâre Vôlkerrecht. NeueJustiz (Berlin)29:617-621,1975, no. 21.

Irie, Keishiro. Theories of peace and rules of war in the Ch'un Ch'in period. Waseda hogaku(Tokyo)50:l-81,1974.

In Japanese.

Ishikawa, H. International humanitarian law; its present situation and facing problems. Hôsôjiho(Tokyo)26:2059-2114, December 1974.

In Japanese.

Kalshoven, Frits. The Conference of government experts on the use of certain conventionalweapons, Lucerne, 24 September-18 October 1974. In Netherlands yearbook of internationallaw, v. 6, 1975. Leiden, A. W. Sijthoff, 1975, p. 77-102.

Kalshoven, Frits. Reaffirmation and development of international humanitarian law applicable inarmed conflicts; the first session of the Diplomatic Conference, Geneva, 20 February-29 March 1974. In Netherlands yearbook of international law, v. 5, 1974. Leiden, A. W.Sijthoff, 1975, p. 3-34.

Mac-Dermot, N. Revisao e implementaçao das Convençoes de Genebra. Ordem dos Advogados doBrasil, revista (Rio de Janeiro)5:205-216, 1974.

McGowan, James J. Jr. Training in the Geneva and Hague Conventions; a dead issue? Revue dedroit pénal et de droit de la guerre (Bruxelles) 14:51-68,1975, no. 1-2.

Summary in French.

257

Malinverni, G. Armes conventionnelles modernes et droit international. In Schweïzerisches Jahr-buch fur internationales Recht, v. 30, 1974. Zurich, Schulthess Polygraphischer Verlag, 1974,p. 23-54.

Meier, G. Der Begriff des bewaffneten Angriffs. Archiv des Volkerrechts (Tubingen)!6:375-386,1975.

Melzer, Y. Concepts of just war. Leyden, Sijthoff, 1975,190 p.

Mesterovic, D. Le secours pour les services de santé en cas de conflit armé et en cas de catastrophe.In International Law Association, Report of the 55th Conference held at New York, Aug. 21-26, 1972. London, 1974, p. 312-327.

Miles, J. R. Current initiatives in the laws of armed conflict. Air Force law review (Alabama)16:69-75, winter 1974.

Miller, R. I. The law of war. Lexington, Mass., Heath, 1975, 329 p. (Lexington books.)

Ohnuma, Yasuaki. Introduction to the study of war responsibility. Tokyo, Tokyo UniversityPress, 1975, 449 p.

In Japanese.Partsch, K. J. Neue Entwicklungen zum Begriff des internationalen bewaffheten Konfliktes. Neue

Zeitschrift fur Wehrrecht (Berlin)17:46-52, 1975.

Paust, Jordan J. Terrorism and the international law of war. Revue de droit pénal militaire et dedroit de la guerre (Bruxelles)14:13-49, 1975, n° 1-2.

Summary in French.

Pictet, J. S. Humanitarian law and the protection of war victims. Leyden, SijthofF, 1975, 138 p.(Teneat lex gladium, 4.)

Pictet, J. S. Le pendule de l'histoire. (Le développement du droit humanitaire pendant un siècle—1874-1973.) Revue de droit pénal militaire et de droit de la guerre (Bruxelles)14:287-295,1975, n° 3-4.

To be continued.

Pilloud, Claude. The concept of international armed conflict; further outlook. International reviewof the Red Cross (Geneva) 15:7-16, January 1975.

Pokstefl, Josef [und] Michael Bothe. Bericht uber Entwicklungen und Tendenzen des Kriegsrechtsseit den Nachkriegskodifikationen. Zeitschrift fur auslândisches ôffentliches Recht und Vôl-kerrecht (Stuttgart)35:574-640, 1975, no. 3.

Râber, F. Das Recht zum Krieg im zwanzigsten Jahrhundert und die Auswirkungen auf denKriegsbegriff. Zurich, Juris Druck, 1975, 174 p. (Diss.—Zurich.)

Reisman, M. Private armies in a global war system; prologue to decision. In Moore, J. N. Law andcivil war in the modern world. Baltimore, Md., Johns Hopkins Univ. Press, 1974, p. 252-303.

Salmon, Jean. Participation du G.R.P. du Sud Vietnam aux travaux de la Conférence diplomatiquesur la réaffirmation et le développement du droit international humanitaire applicable dansles conflits armés. Revue belge de droit international (Bruxelles)ll :191-210, 1975, n° 1.

Scheuner, U. Neutrality in public international law today. Law and state (Tubingen)7:53-72,1973.

Seidl-Hohenveldern, I. The idea of equality in jus in bello. Law and state (Tubingen)12:77-84,1975.

Solf, Waldemar A. and W. George Grandison. International humanitarian law applicable in armedconflict. Journal of international law and economics (Washington, D.C.)10:567-598, August-September 1975.

Suckow, S. Conference on humanitarian law, phase two. Review of the International Commissionof Jurists (Geneva)no. 14:42-54, June 1975.

Suter, Keith D. Modernizing the laws of war. Australian outlook (Melbourne)29:211-219, August1975.

Trooboff, P. D. Law and responsibility in warfare; the Vietnam experience. Chapel Hill, N.C.,Univ. of North Carolina Press, 1975, 280 p.

258

Maintenance of peaceMaintien de la paix

Mantenimiento de la paz

Aschlener, Roland. Die Vereinten Nationen und die Friedenswahrung. Wùrzburg [P und S Sofort-druck] 1973, xxv, 102 p.

Diss. Wûrzburg. Bayerische Julius-Maximilian-Universitât. Hohe Juristische Fakultât,1973.

Chaudhri, Mohammed Ahsen. United Nations peace mechanisms and rules. Karachi, Council forPakistan Studies [1973], 93 p.

"Published in cooperation with the Department of International Relations, University ofKarachi".

Dai, P. Canada and the review of United Nations peacekeeping operations. In Canadian yearbookof international law, v. 12, 1974. Vancouver, B.C., University of British Columbia, 1974,p. 186-210.

Galtung, J. Nonterritorial actors and the problem of peace. In Mendlovitz, S. H. On the creationof a just world order. New York, Free Press, 1975, p. 151-188.

Gauland, A. Friedenssicherung durch Gleichgewichtspolitik. Archiv des Volkerrechts (Tubingen)16:367-374, 1975.

Mulicki, Tadeusz. Operacje pokojowe ONZ na Bliskim Wschodzie. Sprawy miedzynarodowe(Warszawa)28:35-48, kwiecien 1975.

[Peace-making operations of the United Nations in the Middle East.]

Papadopoulos, Andrestinos N. The maintenance of international peace and the United Nations; alegal analysis. International relations (London)5 : 800-824, May 1975.

THMcpOaes, P. M. OOH H noflnepxaHHe MOKflynapOflHoro MHpa. [Ois. pefl. P. M.»TnMep6aeB.]MocKBa, MeacflynapOflHwe OTHOUICHHH, 1973, 184 c.

Membership and representationAdmission et représentation à l 'ONUHJICHCTBO H npeACTasirrejibCTBOMiembros y representaciôn

Colin, Jean-Pierre. Le G.R.P. et les Nations Unies. Revue belge de droit international (Bruxelles)11:47-55, 1975, n° 1.

Lazarus, C. Le statut des mouvements de libération nationale à l'Organisation des Nations Unies.In Annuaire français de droit international, v. 20, 1974. Paris, Centre national de la recherchescientifique, 1975, p. 173-200.

Nowinska-Rosati, Teresa. Czlonkostwo stowarzyszone w organizacjach systemy ONZ. Sprawymiedzynarodowe (Warszawa)27:122-133, pazdziernik 1974.

[Associated membership in the organizations of the United Nations system.)

Osato, Masao. The problem of two Koreas. In Japanese annual of international law, no. 18,1974. Tokyo, The International Law Association of Japan, 1974., p. 51-65.

Most-favoured-nation clauseClause de la nation la plus favoriséeOrosopKH o pexcHMe HaiiGojibiiiero ojiaronpHHTCTBOBauHHClâusula de la nation mas favorecida

Castells, Adolfo. La clâusula de la naciôn mas favorecida en las relaciones comerciales; desarrollo-subdesarrollo. Paris, Imprimerie alençonnaise, 1974, 94 p.

Kramer, H. R. Das Meistbegunstigungsprinzip und die Entwicklungslander. In Jahrbuch furinternationales Recht, v. 17, 1974. Gottingen, Vandenhoeck und Reprecht, 1974, p. 125-144.

259

Murase, Shinya. Treatise on the most-favoured-nation clause. Kokusaiho gaiko zasshi (Tokyo)[Journal of Japanese Law and Diplomacy] 72:429-476, January 1974; 72:535-585, February1974.

In Japanese. Summary in English.Ryan, K. W. Most-favoured-nation clause and regional economic integration. University of Queens-

land law journal (Queensland)8:3-18, December 1973.

NamibiaNamibieHaMHÔHHNamibia

Persaud, Motee. Namibia and the International Court of Justice. Current history (Philadelphia)68:220-225, May 1975.

Narcotic drugsStupéfiantsHapKOTHHecKHe cpeflCTBaEstupefacientes

Bassiouni, M. C. International aspects of drug abuse; problems and a proposal. John Marshalljournal of practice and procedure (Chicago)9:3-45, fall 1975.

Bassiouni, M. C. International narcotics control system; a proposal. Catholic lawyer (Jamaica,N.Y.)19:119-163, spring 1973.

Non-self-governing territoriesTerritoires non autonomesHecaMoynpaBjifliomHecH reppHropHHTerritories no autonomes

Green, D. Michael. America's strategic trusteeship dilemma; its humanitarian obligations. Texasinternational law journal (Austin, Texas)9:19-49, winter 1974.

le, Masaharu. Evolution of the system of non-self-governing areas. Kobe, Kobe City College ofForeign Languages, 1974, 167 p.

In Japanese.Metelski, J. B. Micronesia and free association; can federalism save them? California Western

international law journal (San Diego, Calif.) 5:162-183, winter 1974.Self-executing treaties: trusteeship agreements; citizens of Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands

have rights under the trusteeship agreement which are judicially enforceable. Texas inter-national law journal (Austin, Tex.)10:138-149, winter 1975.

Outer spaceEspace extra-atmosphériqueKocMHnecKoe npocrpaHCTBOEspacio ultraterrestre

Bueckling, A. Bemerkungen zum Weltraumregisterabkommen (Entwurf). Zeitschrift fur Luftrechtund Weltraumrechtsfragen (Koln)24:4-12, Mârz 1975.

Bueckling, A. Weltraumrecht in der Krise; Ansàtze zu einem internationalen Satellitenverkehrs-recht. Film und Recht (Munchen)19:72-77, 1975.

Busâk, Jan. Prâvni problémy primého rozhlasového vysilâni z druzic. Prâvnik (Praha)! 14:143-157,1975, no. 3.

260

Christel, C. Q. Space joii.f. ventures; the United States and developing nations. Akron law review(Akron, Ohio)8:398-415, spring 1975.

Cocca, A. A. Problemas de la responsabilidad ante la convivencia en estaciones orbitales. Boleiinde la Facultad de Derecho y Ciencias Sociales (Cordoba, Argenti na)38:81-94, enero-diciembre1974.

Colloquium on the law of outer space, 17th, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. Proceedings, October1-4,1974, edited by Mortimer D. Schwartz. Davis, Calif., University of California Law School,1975, 401 p.

Dauses, Manfred A. Direct television broadcasting by satellites and freedom of information.Journal of space law (University, Miss.)3:59-72, spring-fall 1975.

Farris, Robert H. The problem of delimitation in space law. Ann Arbor, Mich., Xerox UniversityMicrofilms [1975], 324 p.

Diss. Notre Dame, Ind. University, 1974. Bibliography : p. 275-324.

Fenema, Peter van. The 1972 Convention on International Liability for Damage Caused by SpaceObjects. Montreal, 1974, 271 p. (3 fiches) (Canada. National Library. Canadian theses onmicrofiche, 18209.)

Theses. McGill University. Institute of Air and Space Law, 1973.

Galloway, Eilene. Direct broadcast satellites and space law. Journal of space law (University,Miss.)3:3-72, 107-119, spring and fall 1975.

Gorove, Stephen. Direct television broadcasting satellites; some alternatives in case of an impasse.Journal of space law (University, Miss.)3:55-57, spring-fall 1975.

Kido, Masahiko. Fundamental questions relating to the law of outer space. Tokyo, KazamaShobo, 1975, 234 p.

In Japanese.

Klinter, W. Brusseler Satellitenkonvention. Zeitschrift fur Luftrecht und Weltraumrechtsfragen(Koln)24:286-298, Dezember 1975.

Klinter, W. Satellitenrundfunk und die Problematik des internationalen Urheber- und Leistungs-schutzes. Archiv fur Urheber-, Funk- und Theaterrecht (Munchen)70:41-73, 1974.

Summaries in French and English.Kunz, Otto. K nëkterym mezinârodnëprâvnim aspektum sifeni signâlu prenâsejicich program

pomoci umëlych druzic zemë. Prâvnik (Praha)113:1031-1049, 1974, no. 11.

Moore, G. E. Earth resource satellites; a puzzle for the United Nations. Harvard international lawjournal (Cambridge, Mass.)16:648-656, summer 1975.

Munch, J. B. Aspects juridiques de la radiodiffusion par satellite. Berne, Lang, 1975, 272 p. (Publi-cations universitaires européennes. Série II : Sciences juridiques, 121.)

Ogunbanwo, Ogunsola O. International law and outer space activities. Den Haag, MartinusNijhoff, 1975, xix, 278 p.

Summary in Dutch.Proefschrift. Leiden. Rijksuniversiteit, 1975.

Patermann, Christian. Applicable law in cases of tort damages caused by direct broadcast satellites.Journal of space law (University, Miss.)3:47-53, spring-fall 1975.

Pikus, Irwin M. Legal implications of direct broadcast technology. Journal of space law (University,Miss.)3:39-45, spring-fall 1975.

Powell, J. T. Direct broadcast satellites; the conceptual convergence of the free flow of informationand national sovereignty. California Western international law journal (San Diego, Calif.)6:1-40, winter 1975.

Preuschen, R. von. Internationale Zusammenarbeit bei der Nutzung von Weltraumlaboratorien.Zeitschrift fur Luftrecht und Weltraumrechtsfragen (Kôln)24:13-25, Mârz 1975.

261

BepemeTHH, B. C. HcnoJibsoBanne KocMnnecKoro npocrpaHCTBa B npHKJiaflHtix UCJIHX H rocynap-CTBeHHbiâ cysepeHHTCT. CoeemcKoe zocydapcmeo u npaeo (MocKBa) N° 8:84-91, 1975.

[The use of outer space in the applied purposes and the State sovereignty.]

Williams, Sylvia Maureen. The role of equity in the law of outer space. International relations(London)5:776-799, May 1975.

Yamamoto, Soji. A study of the permanent agreement relating to INTELSAT. Tokyo, KokusaiDenshin Denwa, Inc., 1973, 382 p.

In Japanese.

Peaceful settlement of disputesRèglement pacifique des différendsMnpaoe paapemcHHe cnopoaArreglo pacifico de controversias

Charter of the United Nations. In International Law Association, Report of the 55th Conferenceheld at New York, Aug. 21-26, 1972. London, 1974, p. 328-378.

Migliazza, A. Natura ed efficacia dell'arbitrato internazionale. Archivio giuridico "Filippo Serafini"(Modena, Italy) 186:65-92, 1974, no. 1-2.

Wilson, Larman C. The settlement of conflicts within the framework of relations between regionalorganizations and the United Nations : the case of Cuba, 1962-1964. Netherlands internationallaw review (Leyden)22:269-281, 1975, no. 3.

Political and security questionsQuestions politiques et de sécuritéIIojiHTHHecKiie Bonpocbi H Bonpocbi 6e3onacnocTHCuestiones politicas y de seguridad

Coussirat-Coustère, Vincent. La crise chypriote de l'été 1974 et les Nations Unies. In Annuairefrançais de droit international, v. 20,1974. Paris, Centre national de la recherche scientifique,1975, p. 437-455.

Evriviades, M. L. Légal dimension of the Cyprus conflict. Texas international law journal (Austin,Tex.)l0:227-264, spring 1975.

Fischer, G. La Conférence des non-alignés d'Alger. In Annuaire français de droit international,v. 19, 1973. Paris, Centre national de la recherche scientifique, 1974, p. 9-33.

Fisher, Robert A. Following in another's footsteps ; the acquisition of international legal standingby the Palestine Liberation Organization. Syracuse journal of international law and commerce(Syracuse, N.Y.)3:221-253, spring 1975.

Focsaneanu, L. La République populaire de Chine à l'ONU, problèmes politiques et de sécurité. InAnnuaire français de droit international, v. 20, 1974. Paris, Centre national de la recherchescientifique, 1975, p. 115-152.

Joyner, C. C. The 1971 Indo-Pakistani war in retrospect. Eastern journal of international law(Madras)7:101-120, July 1975.

Kranidiotis, Nicos. The Cyprus problem; the proposed solutions and the concept of the indepen-dent and sovereign state. Athens, C. A. Michalas S.A. Press, 1975, 78 p.

Misra, K. P. The role of the United Nations in the Indo-Pakistani conflict, 1971. Delhi, VikasPublishing House, 1973, 197 p.

Nitecka-Jagiello, B. Konflikt cypryjski. Sprawy miedzynarodowe (Warszawa)no. 6:100-109, 1975.[The Cyprus conflict.]

Rostow, Eugene V. The illegality of the Arab attack on Israel of October 6,1973. American journalof international law (Washington, D.C.)69:272-289, April 1975.

Thomas, A. V. W. and A. J. Thomas Jr. The Cyprus crisis 1974-75; political-juridical aspects.Southwestern law journal (Dallas, Tex.)29:513-546, 1975.

262

Zacklin, Ralph. The United Nations and Rhodesia; a study in international law. N.Y., Praeger[1974], 188 p. (Praeger special studies in international politics and government.)

"Chronology of United Nations Security Council resolutions on Rhodesia from 1965to 1973", p. 115-136.

Progressive development and codification of international law (in general)Développement progressif et codification du droit international (en général)IIporpeccHBHoe paaBHTHe H KOAH<pHKaqHH MeîKayHapojMioro npasa (oômjîe laonpocu)Desarrollo progresivo y codification del derecho internacional (en general)

Castrén, Erik. Folkràttskommissionen 25 âr. Nordisk tidsskrift for international ret og jus gentium(Kobenhavn)43:33-40, 1973, no. 1-4.

Cho, Minkyu. Codification of international law, with emphasis on the International Law Commis-sion of the United Nations. Ann Arbor, Mich., Xerox University Microfilms, 1975, 348 p.

Diss. Minnesota. University, 1974.Bibliography: p. 330-348..

Daudet, Y. La Commission du droit international des Nations Unies. In Annuaire français dedroit international, v. 19, 1973. Paris, Centre national de la recherche scientifique, 1974,p. 679-695.

•Daudet, Y. La Commission du droit international des Nations Unies. In Annuaire français dedroit international, v. 20, 1974. Paris, Centre national de la recherche scientifique, 1975,p. 553-594.

Dupuy, R. J. La contribution de l'Académie au développement du droit international. In Recueildes cours de l'Académie de droit international de La Haye, 1973-1. Leyde, A. W. Sijthoff,1974, p. 45-74.

Fitzmaurice, G. The contribution of the Institute of International Law to the development ofinternational law. In Recueil des cours de l'Académie de droit international de La Haye,'1973-1. Leyde, A. W. Sijthoff, 1974, p. 203-260.

Kearney, Richard D. The twenty-sixth session of the International Law Commission. Americanjournal of international law (Washington, D.C.) 69:591-611, July 1975.

Lachs, M. Vingt-cinquième anniversaire de la Commission du droit international. ÔsterreichischeZeitschrift fur ôffentliches Recht (Wien)26:221-226, Juli 1975.

Marin Lôpez, A. Codificaciôn del derecho internacional pûblico en la Organization de NacionesUnidas. Revistade derecho (Conception, Chile)no. 369:530-544, junio 1975; no. 370-371:658-676, julio-agosto 1975.

Matsui, Yoshiro. The development of international law in the United Nations and Asian-Africanstates. Kokusai mondai (Tokyo)no. 189:28-39, December 1975.

In Japanese.

Paul, Vladimir. Dvacetpët let cinnosti komise OSN pro mezinârodni prâvo. Prâvnik (Praha)113:847-851, 1974, no. 9.

Poeggel, W. Funf-und-zwanig Jahre Tàtigkeit der Vôlkerrechtskommission der Vereinten Nationen.Staat und Recht (Berlin)23:1694-1701, Oktober 1974.

Ramcharan, B. G. The International Law Commission. In Yearbook of world affairs, v. 29,1975;London, Stevens and Sons, 1975, p. 283-300.

Ramcharan, B. G. The International Law Commission and international environmental law.Ocean management (Amsterdam)2:315-322, December 1975.

Rosenne, S. League of Nations Conference for the Codification of International Law,. 1930.Dobbs Ferry, N.Y., Oceana, 1975, 4 v.

Sohn, L. B. Voting procedures in United Nations Conferences for the codification of internationallaw. American journal of international law (Washington, D.C.)69:310-353, April 1975.

263

Stewart, J. B. Jr. International Law Commission, 26th session; draft articles on the succession ofstates in respect of treaties; the pragmatic development of international law. Harvard inter-national law journal (Cambridge, Mass.)l 6:638-647, summer 1975.

VCCHKO, E. T. « H. A. VuiaKOB. ITporpaMMa Mupa H nporpeccHBHoe paaBHTHenpasa. CoeemcKoe zocydapcmeo u npaeo (MocKBa) Ns 4:112-120, 1975.

[The programme of peace and progressive development of international law.]

Recognition of StatesReconnaissance d'EtatsïïpmHainie rocyaapcTBReconocimiento de Estados

Kuyper, P. J. Erkenning; politick in het volkenrecht en volkenrecht in de politick. Internationalespectator (VGravenhage)28:587-594, 8 October 1974.

Verhoeven, Joe. La reconnaissance internationale dans la pratique contemporaine; les relationspubliques internationales. Paris, A. Pedone, 1975, 861 p. (Revue générale de droit internationalpublic. Publications. Nouvelle série, 24.)

RefugeesRéfugiésEexceanuRefugiados

Dorfman, Marc B. Implementing Article XI of the Convention of the Reduction of Statelessness;international legal "aid". Harvard international law journal (Cambridge, Mass.)16:657-669,summer 1975.

Honma, Hiroshi. Legal theory on political refugees. Tokyo, Waseda University Press, 1974,469 p.In Japanese.

Minagawa, Takeshi. Political refugees and international law. Kokusai mo/ufa/(Tokyo)no. 174:2-15,September 1974.

In Japanese.

Mori, Yoshinori. International protection of refugees. Kokusai mondai (Tokyo)no. 174:27-39,September 1974.

In Japanese.

Shimada, Yukio. Der BegrifT "Politische Flùchtlinge" im Vôlkerrecht. Kokusaiho gaiko zasshi(Tokyo) [Journal of International Law and Diplomacy] 74:1-46, June 1975.

In Japanese. Summary in German.

Right of asylumDroit d'asileripaao yoewHioaDerecho de asilo

Grahl-Madsen, Atle. An international convention on the territorial asylum : background, dis-cussion, proposals. Bergen, Norges Handelsh0yskole, 1975, 90 p.

Legal aspects of the problem of asylum. In International Law Association, Report of the 55thConference held at New York, Aug. 21-26, 1972. London, 1974, p. 176-211.

Nishii, M. Formation of the principle of nonextradition of political criminals. Hogaku ronso(Kyoto)94:18-39, November 1973; 95:33-64, June 1974.

In Japanese.

264

Vukas, Budislav. Some comments on the draft convention on territorial asylum. In Revue égyp-tienne de droit international, v. 30, 1974. Le Caire, Société égyptienne de droit international,1974, p. 98-119.

Rule of lawPrimauté du droit

Imperio del derecho

Boasson, C. International law, conflict resolution and peace research; a concise orientation. Israellaw review (Tel Aviv)10:178-191, April 1975.

Sauer, E. F. Pragmatik; bessere Politik durch besseres Vôlkerrecht. Bonn, Molberg, 1974, 170 p.

Schwarzenberger, G. Civitas maxima? In Yearbook of world affairs, v. 29, 1975. London, Stevensand Sons, 1975, p. 337-368.

Taylor, G. D. S. The content of the rule against abuse of rights in international law. In Britishyearbook of international law, v. 46, 1972-73. London, Oxfprd U.P., 1975, p. 323-352.

Self-determinationLibre détermination

Libre determinaciôn

Ahmad, S. H. The United Nations and thé colonies. Bombay, Asia Pub. House, 1975, 458 p.

Blum, Y. Z. Reflections on the changing concept of self-determination. Israel law review (TelAviv)10: 509-514, October 1975.

Doehring, Karl. Das Selbstbestimmungsrecht der Vôlker aïs Grundsatz des Vôlkerrechts. Karls-ruhe, Miiller, 1974, 107 p. (Deutsche Gesellschaft fur Vôlkerrecht, Berichte 14.)

Firmage, E. B. The war of national liberation and the third world. 7«,Moore, J. N. Law and civilwar in the modern world. Baltimore, Md., Johns Hopkins Univ. Press, 1974, p. 304-347.

Gross, Leo. The right of self-determination in international law. In Kilson, M. L. New states in themodern world. Cambridge, Mass., Harvard Univ. Press, 1975, p. 136-157.

Ie, Masaji. The right of self-determination and internal war. Kokusaiho gaiko zasshi (Tokyo)73 :125-167, November 1974.


Jones, Robert E. Anti-colonialism at the United Nations : the origin and policy of the UnitedNations Special Committee on Colonialism, 1960-1967. Ann Arbor, Mich., University Micro-films [1974], 385 p.

Diss. Notre Dame, Ind. University. Dept. of Government and International Studies, 1974.Kaladharan Nayar, M. G. Self-determination beyond the colonial context; Biafra in retrospect.

Texas international law journal (Austin, Tex.)10: 321-345, spring 1975.Kaladharan Nayar, M. G. Self-determination; the Bangladesh experience. Revue des droits de

l'homme (Paris)7: 23 1-271, 1974.

Lelyveld, J. v. Over bevrijdingsbewegingen, politick en recht. Internationale spectator ('s-Graven-hage)28 : 362-371, 8 juni 1974.

Mathy, Denise. L'autodétermination de petits territoires revendiqués par des Etats tiers; lesrevendications marocaine, espagnole et guatémaltèque. Revue belge de droit international(Bruxelles)l 1:129-1 60, 1975, n° 1.

Menon, P. K. The right to self-determination; a historical appraisal. Revue de droit international, desciences diplomatiques et politiques (Genève)52: 183-200, juillet-septembre 1975.

Passalacqua, J. L. A. de. La cuestiôn de Puerto Rico ante la Organizaciôn de las Naciones Unidas.Revista de derecho puertorriqueno (Ponce, P.R.)12:191-220, octubre-diciembre 1972.

265

Pomerance, M. Methods of self-determination and the argument of primitiveness. In Canadianyearbook of international law, v. 12, 1974. Vancouver, B.C., University of British Columbia,1974, p. 38-66.

Ronzitti, Natalino. Wars of national liberation; a legal definition. In Italian yearbook of inter-national law, v. 1., 1975. Napoli, Editoriale Scientifica, 1975, p. 192-205.

Schwebel, S. M. Wars of liberation; as fought in U.N. organs. In Moore, J. N. Law and civil warin the modern world. Baltimore, Md., Johns Hopkins Univ. Press, 1974, p. 446-457.

Sinha, S. Prakash. Has self-determination become a principle of international law today? Indianjournal of international law (New Delhi)14: 332-361, July-December 1974.

Social defenceDéfense sociale

Defensa social

Skoler, Daniel L. World implementation of the United Nations standard minimum rules fortreatment of prisoners. Journal of international law and economics (Washington, D.C.)10:453-482, August-September 1975.

The United Nations standard minimum rules for the treatment of prisoners. Criminal law bulletin(Boston, Mass.)l 1:637-646, 1975.

State responsibilityResponsabilité des EtatsOTBCTCTBeHHOCTb POCVflapCTB

Responsabilidad de los Estados

Garcia-Amador, F. V. Draft articles on the responsibility of the state for injuries caused in itsterritory to the person or property of aliens. In Recent codifications of the law of state responsi-bility for injuries to aliens. Dobbs Ferry, N.Y., Oceana, 1974, p. 1-132.

Oeser, E. [et al.]. Zu einigen Grundfragen der volkerrechtlichen Verantwortlichkeit. Gesellschafts-und Sprachwissenschaftliche Reihe (Berlin)12:429-468, 1973, no. 6.

Pazarci, Huseyin. La responsabilité internationale des Etats à l'occasion des contrats conclus entreEtats et personnes privées étrangères. Revue générale de droit international public (Paris)79:354-421, avril-juin 1975.

Przetacznik, Franciszek. International responsibility of the state for failure to afford the specialprotection for foreign officials. Revue de droit international de sciences diplomatiques etpolitiques (Genève)52: 3 10-326, octobre-décembre 1974; 53:29-49, janvier-mars 1975.

Sohn, L. B. and R. R. Baxter. Convention on thé international responsibility of states for injuriesto aliens ; final draft with explanatory notes. In Recent codifications of the law of state responsi-bility for injuries to aliens. Dobbs Ferry, N.Y., Oceana, 1974, p. 133-^402.

Vitânyi, Bêla. International responsibility of States for their administration of justice. Netherlandsinternational law review (Rotterdam)22:131-163, 1975, no. 2.

State sovereigntySouveraineté des EtatsFocyAapCTBeHHbiH cyBepenirreTSoberania de los Estados

,ZJeKaHO3OB, P. B. HeKOTopbie sonpocu lopHflHiecKoii npHpoflbi TeppHTopnft (npocxpancTB),H3tflTbix H3 c4>epbi rocyâpcTBCHHoro cyBepeKiiTCTa. B KU.: COBCTCKHÔ eacero^HHK Meacfly-

npasa 1973. Mocxsa, HaâTejibCTBo Hayica, 1975, c. 203-215.Summary in English.[Some questions on the juridical nature of areas (spaces) withdrawn from state sovereignty.]

266

Jenks, Wilfred. Concepto actual de la soberania. Revista peruana de derecho international (Lima)29: 28-41, 1971-72, no. 70.

Riphagen, W. Some reflections on "functional sovereignty". In Netherlands yearbook of inter-national law, v. 6, 1975. Leiden, A. W. Sijthoff, 1975, p. 121-165.

Strakosch, Heinrich E. Die Antinomie des souverànen Staates. Ôsterreichische Zeitschrift furôffentliches Recht (Wien)25:81-112, 1974, no. 1-2.

State successionSuccession d'EtatsIIpaBonpeeMCTBO rocyâpcieSucesiôn de los Estados

Caggiano, Giandonato. The ILC draft on the succession of states in respect of treaties; a criticalappraisal. In Italian yearbook of international law, v. 1, 1975. Napoli, Editoriale Scientifica,1975, p. 69-98.

Gaja, Giorgio. Reservations to treaties and the newly independent states. In Italian yearbook ofinternational law, v. 1, 1975. Napoli, Editoriale Scientifica, 1975, p. 52-68.

Mochi Onory, A. G. In tema di sovranità e successione di stati. Jus; rivista di scienze giuridichs(Milano)22:99-122, marzo 1975.

Morvay, Werner. Souverânitàtsùbergang und Rechtskontinuitàt im Britischen Commonwealth;ein Beitrag zur Lehre von der Staatensukzession. Berlin, Springer Verlag, 1974, 116 p. (Beit-rage zum auslàndischen offentlichen Recht und Volkerrecht, 65.)

O'Connell, D. P. State succession and government contracts. In International Law Association,Report of the 55th Conference held at New York, Aug. 21-26, 1972. London, 1974, p. 654-660.

Schermers, Henry G. Succession of states and international organizations. In Netherlands yearbookof international law, v. 6, 1975. Leiden, A. W. Sijthoff, 1975, p. 10:i-119.

*Szafarz, Renata. Sukcesja panstw a traktaty w projekcie kodyfikacyjnym ONZ. Panstwo i prawo

(Warszawa)30:96-108, grudziefi 1975.

Ward, R. O. Consequences of the succession of states on nationality of corporations in privateinternational law "summum ius summa iniuria". University of West Los Angeles law review(Culver City, Calif .)7: 96-1 19, winter 1975.

3axapoBa, H. B. IIpaBonpeeMCTBO rocyzjapcTB. MocKBa, Hsfl-so MeîryHapOAHtie1973. 124 c.

Technical assistanceAssistance techniqueTexHHHecKaH noMOiin»Asistencia técnica

Munteanu, Roxana. Rôle de l'ONU dans le développement de la coopération économique ettechnico-scientifique internationale. Revue roumaine de sciences sociales; série de sciences juri-diques (Bucarest)19:195-210, 1975, n° 2.

Non-Governmental Organizations in economic and social development; a UNITAR conference atSchloss Hernstein, Austria. New York, United Nations Institute for Training and Research,1975, 43 p.

Trade and developmentCommerce et développementToproBJia H pasBHTHeComercio y desarrollo

Burnett, R. Negotiation of international agreements in the field of commerce and investment;problems of relevance to newly-independent states. Journal of world trade law (London)9:231-265, May-June 1975.

267

Gallavresi, Lucilla. Terzo Mondo; la difficile ricerca di una strategia per lo sviluppo. In Annuariodi politica internazionale, v. 25, 1972. Milano, Istituto per gli Studi di Politica Internationale,1974, p. 353-378.

Grewlich, Klaus W. Die UN-Konvention iïber einen Verhaltenskodex fur Linienkonferenz. Zeit-schriftfùr auslândisches offentliches Recht und Volkerrecht (Stuttgart)35: 742-758, 1975, no. 4.

Ida, R. La revendication d'une réelle égalité entre les Etats au sein des organisations internationaleséconomiques; genèse de la CNUCED. Hogaku ronso (Kyoto)96: 34-63, December 1974;97:63-103, June 1975.

In Japanese.Kamara, Marjon Vashti. United Nations Capital Development Fund : poor and rich worlds in

collision, by M. V. Kamara [and] J. C. Piano. [Kalamazoo, Mich., New Issues Press, Instituteof Public Affairs, Western Michigan University, 1974], 98 p.

Lacharrière, G. Ladreit de. Influence de l'inégalité de développement des Etats sur le droit inter-national. In Recueil des cours de l'Académie de droit international de La Haye, 1973-11.Leyde, A. W. Sijthoff, 1974, p. 227-269.

Petersmann, E. U. Entwicklungsvôlkerrecht, droit international du développement, internationaleconomic development law: Mythos oder Wirklichkeit ? In Jahrbuch fur internationalesRecht, v. 17, 1974. Gottingen, Vandenhoeck und Reprecht, 1974, p. 145-176.

Schachter, Oscar. Just prices in world markets; proposals de lege ferenda. American journal ofinternational law (Washington, D.C.)69:101-109, January 1975.

Shah, M. J. Dispute settlement machinery in the convention on a code of conduct for liner con-ferences. Journal of mar itime law and commerce (Washington, D.C.)7:127-168, October 1975.

World hunger and international trade; an analysis and a proposal for action. Yale law journal(New Haven, Conn. )84: 1046-1 077, April 1975.

Use of forceEmploi de la force

Uso de la fuerza

Danisz, Josef. Uvod do problematiky zàkazu pouziti sily v prâvu mezinarodnim. Prâvnik (Praha)114:32-42, 1975, no. 1.

Lillich, Richard B. Economic coercion and the international legal order. International affairs(London)51: 358-371, July 1975.

MeiKKHHCKHH, B. H. YciaB OOH H npHHmm HenpHMeneHHa CHJIM. B KH.: COBCTCKIIHMeacflynapoflHoro npasa 1973. Mocxsa, HsflarejibCTBO Hayica, 1975, c. 82-99.

Summary in English.[The UN Charter and the Principle of Non-Use of Force.]

C. INTERGOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS RELATED TO THE UNITED NATIONSORGANISATIONS INTERGOUVERNEMENTALES RELIÉES À L'ORGANISATIONDES NATIONS UNIESME>KnPABHTEJII>CTBEHHI>IE OPrAHHSAIJHH, CB.33AHHBIE C OPrAHH3AUHEPÏOEBEAHHEHHBIX HAUHÏÏORGANIZACIONES INTERGUBERNAMENTALES RELACIONADAS CON LASNACIONES UNIDAS

Food and Agriculture Organization of the United NationsOrganisation des Nations Unies pour l'alimentation et l'agriculturelïpOAOBOJibcTBeHHasi H cejibcKOXosHHCTBeHHaa opramnamia O6i>eûHeiiHbix HauimOrganization de las Naciones Unidas para la Agricultura y la Alimentation

Alvarenga, I. A world congress on agrarian law? Paper prepared for the VIII Colloquium onAgrarian Law, Paris, 6-8 November 1975, 6 p.

Multilithed.

268

Bombin.X. M. Incentives econômicos forestales en America Latina.-FO:: MAFP/LA/75/4,27 p.,Julio 1975.

Canô, Guillermo J. A legal and institutional frameworkrfor natural resources management,legislative studies, 9. iv+44 p., 1975.

Also in "Spanish.Multilithed.

Caponera, A. Legal-institutional aspects, of water resources conservation, development andmanagement, with particular reference to groundwater resources. Paper prepared for the IIIInternational Symposium on Groundwater and the II International Conference on WaterPlanning, Palermo, Italy, 1-5 November 1975, i+14 p.

Caponera, Dante A. Outline for the preparation of a National Water Resources Law Inventory.Legal Office. Background paper, 7. WS/F 9032, 9 p., 1975.

Also in French and Spanish.Multilithed.

Carroz, Jean. Les nouvelles techniques de coopération entre pays riverains et pêcheurs étrangers;la pêche et le renouvellement du droit de la mer. Travaux du Colloque international tenu àMarseille le 26 mai 1975, Institut du droit de la paix et du développement, p. 23-28.

Carroz, Jean, et Michel Savini. L'aménagement des ressources biologiques de la mer appelle-t-ilune coopération à l'échelle régionale ou mondiale? Revue iranienne des relations internationales(Téhéran)5-6:175-196, hiver 1975-1976.

Crutchfield, J. A., R. Hamlish, G. Moore and C. Walker. Joint ventures in fisheries, IOFC/DEV/75/37, ix + 83 p.,'April 1975.

Multilithed.

Current national legislation relating to the marking, packing and labelling of meat and meatproducts. CCP: ME 75/6, WM/G 1905, 1 + 6 p., August 1975.

Also in French.Multilithed.

Gérard, Alain. Eléments du droit de l'alimentatioiï; structure, principes et dispositions essentielles.Etude de législation, 7. viii+118 p., 1975.

Also in English and Spanish.Multilithed.

Hamlish, R. and G, K. F. Moore. Joint ventures in fisheries development in the CECAF area.CECAF/ECAF Series/75/3(En.), 25 p., 1975.


Limits and status of the territorial sea, exclusive fishing zones, fishery conservation zones and thecontinental shelf. FID/C/127, Rev. 2, v+14 p., 1975.

Also in French and Spanish.Multilithed.

Moore, G. K. Existing and proposed international conventions for the control of marine pollutionand their relevance to the Mediterranean. Legal Office. Background paper, 8, ii+29 p., 1975.


Nanda, Ved P. The world food crisis and the role of law in combating hunger and malnutrition.Journal of international law and economics (Washington, D.C.)10:725-746, August-December1975.

Rapport sur la planification, la politique et la législation forestière en Haiti. Préparé par Raeder-Roitzsch, J. E., et F. Zenny. FO: DP/HAI/72/012. Document de travail, vi + 86 p., 1975.

Multilithed.

269

Rapport au Gouvernement du Togo sur la législation agro-foncière et domaniale. Préparé parMichel L. J. Bachelet. PNUD/SF/TOG/69/007. Rapport de fin de mission, iv + 74 p. Annexes.

Report to the Government of Indonesia. Second Report on Consultancy Services in the field ofWater Legislation (INS/71/002). WS/H 1252, 104 p., July 1975.

Based on the work of Bernard J. Wohlwend.Multilithed.

Report to the Government of Nepal on Seed Legislation. AG: DP/NEP/70/512. Technical report3, vi + 20 p.+ 3 Appendix, 1975.

Based on the work of Romain Ricard and J. R. Thomson.Multilithed.

Report to the Government of Papua New Guinea, forestry legislation project findings and recom-mendations. FO: DP/PNG/74/051. Terminal Report, 93 p., 1975.

Based on the work of Raeder-Roitzsch, J. and F. Zenny.Multilithed.

Report to the Government of the Philippines. Current developments in Philippine water law;suggested interim groundwater regulations. AGO : PHI/70/531, Working document 4, iv + 54 p.+ Annex, 1975.

Based on the work of Frank J. Trelease.Multilithed.

Report to the Government of the Sultanate of Oman on Water Resources Policy. Administrationand legislation. WS/H 1819, 29 p., 1975.

Based on the work of Dante A. Caponera.Multilithed.

Sand, P. H. Comparative table of texts relating to the draft convention for the protection of themarine environment against pollution in the Mediterranean. Legal Office. Background paper,9, iii + 57, 1975.

Multilithed.

Sand, P. H. Consultant's Mission Report (environment law/Indonesia). WS/H2676,17 p., 1975.Multilithed.

Sandoval, Magno Tulio. Legislaciôn de aguas en America Central, Caribe y Mexico. Edited byE. Herrero-Ayllon. Estudio legislative, 8, vi + 196 p., 1975.

Multilithed.

Selected acaricide legislation. Legal Office. Background paper, 5. WS/F8883, iii + 37 p., April 1975.Also in French and Spanish.Multilithed.

Water law in selected European countries. Edited by Bernard J. Wohlwend. Legislative studies,10, vi+257 p., 1975.

Multilithed.

General Agreement on Tariffs and TradeAccord général sur les tarifs douaniers et le commerceFeHepajibHoe comameHHe no TapiKjmivi H roproBjieAcuerdo General sobre Aranceles Aduaueros y Comercio

Baldwin, Robert E. Der Abbau der nichttariflichen Beschrànkungen des Welthandels aïs Ziel derneuen GATT-Verhandlungen. Europa-Archiv (Bonn)29:555-564, 1974, no. 16.

Banks, T. L. GATT, altered economics, and DISC; a legitimate application of rebus sic stantibus.Denver journal of international law and policy (Denver, Colo.)5:121-134, spring 1975.

Espiell.H. G. GATT; accommodating generalized preferences. Journal of world trade law (London)8:341-363, July-August 1974.

270

Groetzinger, Jon Jr. The new GATT code and the international harmonization of productsstandards. Cornell international law journal (Ithaca N.Y.)8:168-188, May 1975.

Hudec, R. E. The GATT legal system and world trade diplomacy. New York, 1975, 399 p. (Praegerspecial studies in international politics and government.)

Hudec, R. E. Retaliation against "unreasonable" foreign trade practices; the new section 301 andGATT nullification and impairment. Minnesota law review (Minneapolis, Minn.)59:461-539,January 1975.

Kanthan, P. P. The legal limitations of GATT and UMCTAD; towards mutual cooperation.Indian journal of international law (New Delhi)! 5:63-78, January-March 1975.

Liang, Y.-s. The establishment of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade. Chung fixing lawreview (Taipei, Taiwan)9:89-95, 1974.

Lortie, P. Economic integration and the law of GATT. New York, 1975, 177 p. (Praeger specialstudies in international economics and development.)

Piontek, Eugcniusz. Unie celne i strefy wolnego handlu a GATT. Sprawy miedzynarodowe (Wars-zawa)27:113-121, kwiecien 1974.

[Custom and tariff unions and GATT.]

Reuland, James M. GATT and state-trading countries. Journal of world trade law (London)9:318-339, May-June 1975.

Roessler, F. GATT and access to supplies. Journal of world trade law (London)9:25-40, January-February 1975.

Roessler, F. Selective balance-of-payments adjustment measures affecting trade; the roles of theGATT and the IMF. Journal of world trade law (London)9:622-653, November-December1975.

Rossetti, G. P. Dumping und Dumpingbekâmpfung. Zurich, 1974, 186 p. (Diss. Zurich.)

Venturini, Gabriejla. La regolamentazione multilatérale degli scambi commercial!; 1'AccordoGénérale sulle Tariffe e il Commercio. Diritto comunitario scambi internazionali (Milano)14:31-62, gennaio-marzo 1975.

Summary in English.

Inter-Governmental Maritime Consultative OrganizationOrganisation Intergouvemementale consultative de la navigation maritimeMoKripaBHTejibcTBeHHaa MopCKan KOHcyjibTaTHBHan opraniuauHHOrganization Consulriva Maritima Intergubernamental

Barr, Philip B. Environmental law; a survey of international marine pollution controls; preludeto Geneva. Vanderbilt journal of transnational law (Nashville, Tenn.)8:477-492, spring 1975.

Bradley, P. G. Marine oil spills; a problem in environmental management. Natural resourcesjournal (Albuquerque, N. Mex.)14:337-359, July 1974.

Brown, E. D. The prevention of marine pollution by oil from ships; competence to establishstandards and competence to enforce standards. In Current legal problems, v. 28, 1975.London, Stevens and Sons, 1975, p. 199-222.

Busby, Richard B. The Convention for the Prevention of Marine Pollution from Land-BasedSources; an effective method for arbitrating international effluent pollution disputes. Cali-fornia Western international law journal (San Diego, Calif.)5:350-375, spring 1975.

Dahak, Driss. La réparation des dommages dus à la pollution des eaux. In Annuaire de l'Associa-tion des auditeurs et anciens auditeurs de l'Académie de droit international de La Haye,v. 41, 1971. La Haye, Martinus Nijhoff, 1971, p. 86-93.

Dubais, B. A. Compensation for oil pollution damage resulting from exploration and exploitationof hydrocarbons in the seabed. Journal of maritime law and commerce (Silver Spring, Md.)6:549-573, July 1975.

271

Emanuelli, C. Le droit international et la responsabilité civile pour les dommages dus à la pollutiondes mers par les hydrocarbures; la convention de Bruxelles de 1969 et ses développementsultérieurs. Revue de droit, Université de Sherbrooke (Sherbrooke, P.Q., Canada)4:25-54, 1973.

Goldie, L. F. E. Liability for oil pollution disasters; international law and the delimitation of com-petences in a federal policy. Journal of maritime law and commerce (Silver Spring, Md.)6:303-329, April 1975.

Goria, Charles F. Compensation for oil pollution at sea; an insurance approach. San Diego law-review (San Diego, Calif.)! 2:717-742, April 1975.

Inter-Governmental Maritime Consultative Organization. The activities of the Inter-GovernmentalMaritime Consultative Organization in relation to shipping and related maritime matters.London,1974, 47 p.

Inter-Governmental Maritime Consultative Organization. Charts of prohibited zones; Interna-tional Convention for the Prevention of Pollution of the Sea by Oil. London, 1975, 1 v.

In English and French.

International Conference on Safety of Life at Sea, London, 1960. Final act. Supplement 2. London,Inter-Governmental Maritime Consultative Organization, 1974, 85 p.

Jurisdiction over vessel-source pollution. Record of the Association of the Bar of the City of NewYork (New York)30:231-254, April 1975.

Kojanec, Giovanni. Compétences des Etats .et réglementation internationale récente en matièrede pollution de la mer; un cas de dédoublement fonctionnel. In Annuaire de l'Association desauditeurs et anciens auditeurs de l'Académie de droit international de La Haye, v. 41, 1971.La Haye, Martinus Nijhoff, 1971, p. 35-40.

Lowe, A. V. The enforcement of marine pollution régulations. San Diego law review (San Diego,Calif.)12:624-653, April 1975.

McHose, J. C. Marine pollution: legislation, litigation, underwriting; where are we? Where away?Forum (Chicago)l0:251-298, fall 1974.

Mensah, T. A. The law relating to the pollution of the seas. In McKnight, A. D. [et al.] Environ-mental pollution control. London, Allen & Unwin, 1974, p. 174-208.

Mestral, A. L. C. de. La Convention internationale de 1973 sur la prévention de la pollution parles navires. In Canadian yearbook of international law, v. 12,1974. Vancouver, B.C., Univer-sity of British Columbia, 1974, p. 239-255.

Morin, J. Y. La pollution des mers au regard du droit international. In Hague. Academy ofInternational Law. La protection de l'environnement et le droit international. Leiden,Sijthoff, 1975, p. 239-352.

Tullio, L. Effetti giuridici délia Convenzione di Bruxelles del 17 dicembre 1971 sul trasportomarittimo di sostanze radioattive. Rivista del diritto délia navigazione (Roma)38:180-200,1972.

Tullio, L. Symposium di Stoccolma del giugno 1972 sul trasporto marittimo di materie nucleari.Rivista del diritto délia navigazione (Roma)38:331-340, 1972.

Wolfrum, Rùdiger. Umweltschutz auf hoher See; Internationale wie nationale Massnahmen undBestrebungen. Verfassung und Recht in Ubersee (Hamburg)S: 201-219, 1975, no. 2.

Wood, L. D. Integrated international and domestic approach to civil liability for vessel-source oilpollution. Journal of maritime law and commerce (Washington, D.C.)7:l-68, October 1975.

Wurfel, Seymour W. Legal measures concerning marine pollution. Principal investigator: S. W.Wurfel. Raleigh, N.C., 1975, 80 p. (North Carolina. State University, Raleigh. Sea GrantProgram. Publication, UNC-SG-75-04.)

Articles researched and written by students of international law at the University ofNorth Carolina in 1974.

272

International Atomic Energy AgencyAgence internationale de l'énergie atomiqueMejKflynapoflHoe areHTCTBo no aTOMHofi 3aeprnHOrganisme Internacional de Energia Atômica

Atchison, R. J. Licensing and regulatory control of nuclear power plants in Canada, 13 p.Paper presented at the IAEA Interregional Training Course on Nuclear Power Project

Planning and Implementation, Karlsruhe Nuclear Research Center, 1975.

Blechschmidt, M. Practical problems in the transport of radioactive materials, 10 p.Paper presented at the IAEA Interregional Training Course on Nuclear Power Project


Boulanger, W. Nuclear liability conventions and their impact on national legislation, 20 p.Paper presented at the IAEA Interregional Training Course on Nuclear Power Project


Fischerhof, H. Aufgaben und Ziele einer internationalen Vereinigung fur Kernenergierecht.Wirtschaftsrecht (Frankfurt/M): 104-109, 1974.

Francis, H. W. Insurance against nuclear risks, 14 p.Paper presented at the IAEA Interregional Training Course on Nuclear Power Project


Ha Vinh, Phuong. Enabling legislation and regulatory determinations for nuclear power pro-gramme. IAEA Interregional Training Course on Nuclear Power Project Planning and Imple-mentation, Karlsruhe Nuclear Research Center, 1975, 5 p.

International Atomic Energy Agency. International treaties relating to nuclear control and dis-armament. Vienna, 1975, 78 p. (Its : Legal series, 9.)

International Atomic Energy Agency. Licensing and regulatory control of nuclear installations.Vienna, 1975, 313 p. (Its : Legal series, 10.)

Reyners, P. Main features of licensing requirements for nuclear installations in several OECDmember countries, 23 p.

Paper presented at the IAEA Interregional Training Course on Nuclear Power ProjectPlanning and Implementation, Karlsruhe Nuclear Research Center, 1975.

Sanders, Benjamin. Safeguards against nuclear proliferation. Cambridge, Mass., MIT Press[1975], 114 p. (A SIPRI monograph.)

Sanders, Benjamin and R. Rometsch. Safeguards against use of nuclear material for weapons.Nuclear engineering international (London)20:682-685, 1975.

Schnurer, H. Licensing and regulatory control of nuclear power plants in the Federal Republicof Germany, 33 p.


Shapar, H. K. Export and import provisions for nuclear materials from the legal point of view,18 p.

Paper presented at the IAEA Interregional Training Course on Nuclear Power ProjectPlanning and Implementation, Karlsruhe Nuclear Research Cemer, 1975.

Shapar, H. K. Legislative and regulatory aspects of nuclear power reactor licensing in the USA,21 p.


Szasz, Paul C. The adequacy of international nuclear safeguards. Journal of international law andeconomics (Washington, D.C.)10:423-436, August-December 1975.

Welck, S. von. Friedliche Kernsprengungen als Herausforderung und Aufgabe internationalerOrganisationen. Frankfurt-a-Main, Deutsche Gesellschaft fur auswârtige Politik, Forschungs-institut, April 1975.

273

Wright, H. A. The conduct of regulatory activities, 17 p.Paper presented at the IAEA Interregional Training Course on Nuclear Power Project

Planning and Implementation, Karlsruhe Nuclear Research Center, 1975.Ziegler, E. Nuclear legislation and regulation : enactment and authority; introduction and survey

of atomic energy law, 26 p.Paper presented at the IAEA Interregional Training Course on Nuclear Power Project


Zimmermann, F. Der internationale Vertrag iiber die Nichtverbreitung von Kernwaffen. Schweizer-ische Juristen-Zeitung (Zurich)71:124-126, 1975.

International Civil Aviation OrganizationOrganisation de l'aviation civile internationaleMeJK^yHapo^HaH opramnauHH rpaxcaaHCKOH aBiiauHHOrganization de Aviation Civil Internacional

Abramovsky, Abraham. Multilateral conventions for the suppression of unlawful seizure and inter-ference with aircraft. Part 1: The Hague Convention. Part 2: The Montreal Convention.Columbia journal of transnational law (New York)13:381-405, 1974; 14:268-300, 1975.

Abramovsky, Abraham. Multilateral conventions for the suppression of unlawful seizure and inter-ference with aircraft; the legality and political feasibility of a multilateral air security enforce-ment convention. Columbia journal of transnational law (New York)14:451-484, 1975, no. 3.

Air law. In International Law Association, Report of the 55th Conference held at New York, Aug.21-26, 1972. London, 1974, p. 729-742.

Air law—Warsaw Convention—mental anguish alone is a compensable injury under Article 17.Seton Hall law review (Newark, N.J.)7:108-125, fall 1975.

Beristain, A. Terrorism and aircraft hijacking. International journal of criminology and penology(London)2:347-389, 1974.

Bhatt, S. Safety in air; recent developments. Indian journal of international law (New Delhi)14:386-399, July-December 1974.

Bockman, Robert T. Aviation law—personal injury—the Warsaw Convention, as modified by theMontreal agreement, acts to establish the air carrier's strict liability for a passenger's personalinjury incurred during an aircraft hijacking. Georgia journal of international and comparativelaw (Athens, Ga.)4:481-487, spring 1974.

Bôckstiegel, K. H. Streitentscheidungszustàndigkeiten in der International Zivilluftfahrtorganisa-tion, ICAO. In Festschrift fur Hermann Jahrreiss zum 80. Geburtstag. Koln [Institut furVolkerrecht und auslàndisches ôffentliches Recht, Univ. zu Koln], 1974, p. 5-18.

Boschi, M. Gli orientamenti giurisprudenziali in tema di cattura illecita di aeromobili. Rivista dipolizia (Roma)28:497-517, 1975.

Boyle, R. P. Guatemala Protocol to the Warsaw Convention. California Western international lawjournal (San Diego, Calif.)6:41-85, winter 1975.

Brooks, Roy L. Skyjacking and refugees; the effect of the Hague Convention upon asylum.Harvard international law journal (Cambridge, Mass.)16:93-112, winter 1975.

Cole, C. V. Extradition treaties abound but unlawful seizures continue. Law Society Gazette(Toronto)9:177-184, 1975, no. 3.

Diamond, Barry R. The Bermuda Agreement revisited; a look at the past, present and future ofbilateral air transport agreements. Journal of air law and commerce (Dallas)41:419-496,summer 1975.

Emanuelli, Claude. Legal aspects of aerial terrorism : the piecemeal vs. the comprehensive ap-proach. Journal of international law and economics (Washington, D.C.)10:503-518, August-September 1975.

274

Evans, A. E. Report on aircraft hijacking in the United States; law and practice. Criminal lawbulletin (Boston)l 0:589-604, September 1974.

Ferrer, M. A. Proposiciones ante la declinaciôn de la Convenciôn de Varsovia-La Haya. Boletinde la Facultad de Derecho y Ciencias Sociales (Cordoba, Argentina)35 : 59-90, enero-diciembre1972.

Florio, J. G. Le Protocole de Guatemala du 8 mars 1971. Lausanne, Ruckstuhl, 1974, 120 p.(Thèse, Lausanne.)

Green, L. C. Extradition v. asylum for aerial hijackers. Israel law review (Tel Aviv)10:207-224,April 1975.

Greenberger, Benjamin L. Warsaw Convention ; passengers' right of recovery against airlines formental anguish suffered in hijacking. Columbia journal of transnational law (New York)13:452-466, 1974, no. 3.

Joyner, N. D. Aerial hijacking as an international crime. Dobbs Ferry, N.Y., Oceana, 1974, 344 p.

Krieken, P. J. van. Hijacking and asylum; some remarks on the hijacking problem and its repres-sion, with respect to the law on asylum. Netherlands international law review (Leyden)22:3-30,1975, no. 1.

Landry, J. E. Swift, sure and equitable recovery; a developing concept in international aviationlaw. New York State Bar journal (Albany, N.Y.)47: 372-374, August 1975.

Landry, J. E. onrfH. V. McCoy. Yes or no on the Guatemala protocol. Forum (Chicago)10:727-770, winter 1975.

Lindauer, J. Kathryn. Recovery for mental anguish under the Warsaw Convention. Journal of airlaw and commerce (Dallas, Tex.)41 : 333-346, spring 1975.

McWhinney, E. W. The illegal diversion of aircraft and international law. Leyden, Sijthoff, 1975,123 p.

MajieeB, K). H. AKTM HeaaKOHHoro BMeuiaTentCTsa B fleHTejibHocTb rpaawaHcicoftrioHHTHflHo-TepMHHOJiorHHecKHiî annapaT. B KH.: CoseTCKHft »;KeroflHHKnpasa 1973. Mocxsa, HsAarejibCTBO Hayxa, 1975, c. 249-258.

Summary in English.[Acts of unlawful interference in operation of civil aviation. Concepts and terminology.]

Mankiewicz, René H. Organisation de l'aviation civile internationale ; la vingt et unième sessionde l'Assemblée. In Annuaire français de droit international, v. 20, 1974. Paris, Centre nationalde la recherche scientifique, 1975, p. 637-658.

Mapelli, Enrique. Convenio sobre medidas conjuntas a aplicar a los Estados que no cumplen lostratados que se refieren a los delitos aeronâuticos. Diritto aereo (Roma)l 3: 219-234, 1974,no. 51/52.

Martin, P. Death and injury in international air transport. Journal of air law and commerce (Dallas,Tex.)41: 255-269, spring 1975.

Minor, W. W. Skyjacking crime control models. Journal of criminal law and criminology (Baltimore,Md.)66: 94-105, March 1975.

Pakay, A. Egyezmények a nemzetkôzi polgâri repûlés biztonsaga érdekeben. Jogtudomanyikôzlôny (Budapest)29 : 292-297, 1974.

[Conventions for the security of international civil aviation.]

Rajski, J. Trends of development of the international law of carriage by air. In Polish yearbook ofinternational law, v. 5, 1972-1973. Warsaw, Institute of Legal Sciences, Polish Academy ofSciences, 1974, p. 209-229.

Schoner, D. Haftung des Reiseveranstalters fur die Luftbefôrderung. Zeitschrift fur Luftrecht undWeltraumrechtsfragen (K6ln)24: 257-267, Dezember 1975.

275

Schiitz, H. J. Der vôlkerrechtliche Rahmen zur Bekâmpfung von Flugzeugentfûhrungen undanderen Terrorakten gegen die internationale Zivilluftfahrt. Ôsterreichische Juristen-Zeitung(Wien)30:225-239, 1975.

Shubber, S. Jurisdiction over crimes on board aircraft. The Hague, Nijhoff, 1973, 369 p.

Smith, C. L. Probable necessity of an international prison in solving aircraft hijacking. Internationallawyer (Chicago)S:269-278, April 1971.

Sundberg, J. Unlawful seizure of aircraft. Arkiv for Luftrett (Oslo)6:l-78, 1974.

Thomson, Georges. La révision de la Convention de Rome. Revue française de droit aérien (Paris)29:233-258, juillet-septembre 1975.

Trêves, T. Appunti in tema di dirottamenti aerei e diritto internazionale générale. Diritto marittimo(Genova)77:47-57, gennaio-marzo 1975.

Wortley, B. A. Aerial hi-jacking. In Caemmerer, Ernst von [et al.}. Festschrift fur Pan J. Zeposanlâsslich seines 65. Geburtstages am 1. Dezember 1973. Athen, Freiburg, 1973, p. 767-776.

International Labour OrganisationOrganisation internationale du TravailMexcAynapo^HaH opraiwiauHH TpyâOrganization International del Trabajo

Bennett, Gordon I. The I.L.O. Convention on Indigenous and Tribal Populations; the resolutionof a problem of vires. In British yearbook of international law, v. 46, 1972-73. London,Oxford U.P., 1975, p. 382-392.

Fifty-ninth session of the International Labour Conference. International labour review (Geneva)110:277-300, October 1974.

Gormley, W. P. The growing protection of human rights and labour standards by the InternationalLabour Organization. Banaras law journal (Varanasi, India)9:l-52, 1973, no. 1-2.

Letourneur, M. Tribunal administratif de l'Organisation internationale du Travail. In Mélangesofferts à Marcel Waline. Le juge et le droit public, I. Paris, Librairie générale de droit et dejurisprudence, 1974, p. 203-214.

Mrâchkov, Vasil. Obligations des Etats membres et contrôle international de l'activité normativede l'Organisation internationale du Travail (l'OIT). In Studies in international law, v. 2,1974.Sofia, Bulgarian Association of International Law, 1974, p. 79-96.

Mrâchkov, Vasil. Prava i politicheska sushtnost na konventsiite i preporukite ne Mezhdunarodnataorganizatsiia na truda. Pravna mis'l (Sofia)l9:13-26, 1975, no. 1.

[Essence juridique et politique des conventions et des recommandations de l'Organisationinternationale du Travail.]

Pazdzior, B. Wplyw Miedzynarodowego biura pracy na konwencje i zalecenia Miedzynarodowejorganizacji pracy. Warszawa, Panstwowe wydawn. naukowe, 1975,160 p. (Acta universitatis.Wratislaviensis, 243. Nauki polityczne, 5.)

Rao, B. Relativity between norms fixed by the International Labour Organisation and labourlegislation in India. Journal of the Indian Law Institute (New Delhi)!6:88-97, January-March1974.

Rossillion, C. "Etudes spéciales" de l'OIT sur l'élimination de la discrimination; de nouveauxmoyens d'examen impartial de situations intéressant la promotion des droits de l'homme.Revue des droits de l'homme (Paris)7:653-669, 1974.

Schnorr, G. Influence of ILO standards on law and practice in the Federal Republic of Germany.International labour review (Geneva) 110:539-564, December 1974.

Stoermann, W. E. ILO activities in the field of multinational enterprises. Journal of international lawand economics (Washington, D.C.) 10:347-353, August-December 1975.

Van der Yen, J. J. M. La liberté, motif juridique dans l'Organisation internationale du TravailRevue des droits de Vhomme (Paris)8:869-882, 1975, n° 4.

276

Vries Reilingh, O. G. de. International Labour Organisation; problems with the supervisorymachinery in 1974. In Netherlands yearbook of international law, v. 5,1974. Leiden, A. W.Sijthoff, 1975, p. 167-174.

Wolf, Francis. L'application des conventions internationales du travail par voie de conventionscollectives. In Annuaire français de droit international, v. 20,1974. Paris, Centre national dela recherche scientifique, 1975, p. 101-114.

Wolf, Francis. ILO experience in the implementation of human rights. Journal of international lawand economics (Washington, D.C.)10:599-625, August-December 1975.

Yiannopoulos, D. C. La Commission d'investigation et de conciliation en matière de libertésyndicale de l'Organisation internationale du Travail. Paris, Librairie générale de droit et dejurisprudence, 1973, 274 p. (Thèse n° 214. Genève.)

International Monetary FundFonds monétaire international

Fondo Monetario International

Cooper, R. N. Prolegomena to the choice of an international monetary system. Internationalorganization (Madison, Wis.)29: 63-97, winter 1975.

Gold, Joseph. The Bretton Woods agreement of July 22, 1944, in the courts. Rabels Zeitschrift furauslândisches und internationales Privatrecht (Tubingen)38:683-719, 1974, no. 4.

Gold, Joseph. Developments in the law and institutions of international economic relations.American journal of international law (Washington, D.C.)68: 687-708, October 1974.

Gold, Joseph. The Fund Agreement in the courts— XI. International Monetary Fund staff papers(Washington, D.C.)22: 206-232, March 1975.

Gold, Joseph. Law and reform of the international monetary system. Journal of international lawand economics (Washington, D.C.)1 0:371-421 , August-December 1975.

Gold, Joseph. Recent international decisions to prevent restrictions on trade and payments.Journal of world trade law (London)9: 63-78, January-February 1975.

Gold, Joseph. Uniformity as a legal principle of the International Monetary Fund. Law and policyin international business (Washington, D.C.)7: 765-811, summer 1975.

Grimm, R. J. Proposals for reform of the international monetary system; an analysis of the legalbases of the present system and suggested alternatives. International bar journal (London)24-32, May 1975.

Halm, George N. A guide to international monetary reform. Lexington, Mass., Lexington Books,[1975], 126 p.

Legal problems in the adoption of a crawling peg exchange rate adjustment mechanism. Stanfordlaw review (Stanford, Calif.)27: 349-385, January 1975.

Pront, P. E. Termination of two-tier gold. Law and policy in international business (Washington,D.C.)7: 273-302, winter 1975.

Trêves, Tullio. Les décisions d'interprétation des statuts du Fonds monétaire international. Revuegénérale de droit international public (Paris)79 : 5-24, janvier-mars 1975.

Verbit, Gilbert P. International monetary reform and the developing countries; the rule of lawproblem. New York, Columbia University Press, 1975, 335 p.

Williams, John S. Extraterritorial enforcement of exchange control regulations under the Inter-national Monetary Fund Agreement. Virginia journal of international law (Charlottesville,Va.)l 5: 320-396, winter 1975.

277

United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural OrganizationOrganisation des Nations Unies pour l'éducation, la science et la cultureOpramuauHH Oote^HHeHHux Hainift no BonpocaM o6pa30Bainifl, nayicH H KyjnvrypuOrganizaciôn de las Naciones Unidas para la Educaciôn, la Ciencia y la Culture

Françon, J. Les Actes de Paris portant révision des conventions internationales sur la propriétélittéraire et artistique. In Annuaire français de droit international, v. 20, 1974. Paris, Centrenational de la recherche scientifique, 1975, p. 626-636.

Goy, R. Les régions établies par l'UNESCO en vue de l'exécution de ses activités régionales. InAnnuaire français de droit international, v. 20, 1974. Paris, Centre national de la recherchescientifique, 1975, p. 613-625.

Kolle, G. Reprography and copyright law; a comparative law study concerning the role of copy-right law in the age of information. International review of industrial property and copyright/uH>(Munich)6:382-417, 1975.

Lang, Gordon. UNESCO and Israel. Harvard international law journal (Cambridge, Mass.)16:676-682, summer 1975.

Olian, I. A. Jr. International copyright and the needs of developing countries; the awakening atStockholm and Paris. Cornell international law journal (Ithaca, N.Y.)7:81-112, May 1974.

Universal Postal UnionUnion postale universelleBcCMHOHblH nOHTOBblH COH>3

Union Postal Universal

Union postale universelle. Bureau international. Actes révisés à Lausanne, 1974, et annotés. Berne,1975-1976, 4 v.

World BankBanque mondialeBceMHpm>iH 6amcBanco Mundial

Grijzen, Johan. Enkele aspecten van ontwikkelingen binnen de Wereldbank. Internationale spec-tator ('s-Gravenhage)29:340-345, juni 1975.

Kindt, John Warren. Providing for environmental safeguards in the development loans given bythe World Bank Group to the developing countries. Georgia journal of international and com-parative law (Athens, Ga.)5:540-557, summer 1975.

Makarczyk, Jerzy. Finansowanie rozwoju gospodarczego w systemic narodoôw zjednoczonych,IBRD, IFC, IDA; studium prawno-miedzynarodowe. Wroclaw, Instytut Nauk Prawnych,Polska Akademia Nauk, 1974, 254 p.

Strobl, J. W. Weltbank und Weltbevôlkerung. Vereinte Nationen (Bonn)22:101-104, August 1974.

International Centre for Settlement of Investment DisputesCentre international pour le Règlement des différends relatifs aux investissements internationauxMeMcdynapodHbiù uenmp no ypezyjiupoeamio uneecmuuuoHHbix cnopoeCentra Internacional de arreglo de diferencias relativas a inversiones

Cherian, Joy. Investment contracts and arbitration; the World Bank Convention on the Settle-ment of Investment Disputes. Leyden, A. W. Sijthoff, 1975,198 p.

World Heath OrganizationOrganisation mondiale de la santéBceMupuasi opramrainui s paBOOxpaHemraOrganizaciôn Mundial de la Salud

Beigbeder, Yves. La représentation du personnel à l'Organisation mondiale de la santé et dans lesprincipales institutions spécialisées des Nations Unies ayant leur siège en Europe. Paris,Librairie générale de droit et de jurisprudence, 1975,289 p. (Bibliothèque de droit international,77.)

278

HOW TO OBTAIN UNITED NATIONS PUBLICATIONS

United Nations publications may be obtained from bookstores and distributorsthroughout the world. Consult your bookstore or write to: United Nations, SalesSection, New York or Geneva.

COMMENT SE PROCUREE LES PUBLICATIONS DES NATIONS UNIES

Les publications des Nations Unies sont en vente dans les librairies et les agencesdépositaires du monde entier. Informez-vous auprès de votre libraire ou adressez-vousà : Nations Unies, Section des ventes, New York ou Genève.

KAK nOJiy^HTB H3AAHHJI OPFAHH 3 AII.HH OBT>EAHHEHHbIX HAIJHH

OpraHuaaijHH O6i,eAHHeHHtix HaqHft MOJKHO KynHTb B KHHHCHI>IX Mara-3HHax H areHTCTBax BO Bcex paftonax Mnpa. HaeoAHTe cnpaBKH 06 HSAanHHX BBaïueM KHHHCHOM RiarasHHe H^H nniiinre no a^pecy: Oprannsai^HH O6i.eAHHeHHi>ix

, HfcHJ-HopK HJIH JKeHesa.

COMO CONSEGUIR PUBLICACIONES DE LAS NACIONES UNIDAS

Las publicaciones de las Naciones Unidas estân en venta en librerias y casas distri-buidoras en todas partes del mundo. Consulte a su librero o dirijase a: NacionesUnidas, Secciôn de Ventas, Nueva York o Ginebra.

Printed in U.S.A. Price: $U.S. 13.00 United Nations publication36549—June 1977—2,175 (or equivalent Sales No. E.77.V.3

in other currencies)

Start Book1

Date post:	07-Oct-2020
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	1 times
Download:	0 times