Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-g7gxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-05T04:52:42.081Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Rôle of the General Assembly of the United Nations in the Admission of Members

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 April 2017

Marie Stuart Klooz
Marie Stuart Klooz*
Affiliation:
Division of International Organization Affairs, Department of State
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The effort of the delegate from Argentina to press the admission of certain states into the United Nations despite the negative vote of one of the five permanent members of the Security Council was denounced by the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, Poland, Belgium, Pakistan, The Netherlands, and France as being contrary to the provisions of the Charter in the discussion on the adoption of the agenda during the Third Session of the General Assembly. These states held that even discussion of such an item by the Assembly was illegal.

Type
Research Article
Information
American Journal of International Law , Volume 43 , Issue 2 , April 1949 , pp. 246 - 261
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of International Law 1949

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Provisional Agenda of the Third Regular Session, Items Proposed by Argentina: “(2) The Admission to the Organization of Italy and all those states whose applications for membership have obtained seven votes in the Security Council.” U. N. Doc. A/586.

2 Austria, Finland, Ireland, Italy, Portugal, Transjordan, and Ceylon have obtained seven votes. United Nations Bulletin, Vol. 5, No. 6 (Sept. 15, 1948), p. 720, and ibid., No. 5 (Sept. 1, 1948), pp. 705 f. See also, Special Report of the Security Council to the General Assembly (TT. N. Doc. A/617). Italy was voted admission 9-2; since one permament member was opposed, the resolution was not adopted (U. N. Doc. S/P.V./279). Since no representative had modified his positions as to the others (Albania, Austria, Bulgaria, Finland, Hungary, Ireland, the People’s Republic of Mongolia, Portugal, Rumania, and Transjordan), the Council adjourned its debates indefinitely and so reported to the Assembly (U. N. Doc. S/P.V./280).

3 U. N. Press Release, GA/280, Sept. 25, 1948. Summary of General Assembly Debate in Paris, pp. 1 f. On the vote to refer the item to the First Committee, however, the item was adopted 29-16, with 10 abstaining.

4 United Nations Conference on International Organization, San Francisco, 1945. Documents, Vol. III: Dumbarton Oaks Proposals, Comments and Proposed Amendments (New York: United Nations Information Organizations, 1945), p. 5.

5 Ibid., p. 545.

6 Ibid., p. 405.

7 Ibid., p. 456.

8 Ibid., p. 256.

9 Ibid., pp. 181 f.

10 Ibid., p. 487.

11 Ibid., p. 346.

12 Ibid., p. 38.

13 Ibid., p. 197.

14 Ibid., Vol. VIII: Commission II, General Assembly, pp. 309 f., 398, 407 f., 426 f., 451 f., 481, 487 f., 495.

15 Ibid., p. 310. Cf. pp. 408, 427, 451 f.

16 Ibid., pp. 487 f.

17 Ibid., p. 495.

18 is Statement of Mr. Edward Stettinius in the Hearings Before the Committee on Foreign Relations, United States Senate (79th Cong., 1st sess.), on The Charter of the United Nations for the Maintenance of International Peace and Security, Submitted by the President of the United States on July 2, 1945 (Washington: U. S. Government Printing Office, 1945), p. 81.

19 United Nations Conference on International Organization. Documents, Vol. XI : Commission III, Security Council, pp. 305 f., 309 f., 317 ff., 347 ff., 432 ff., 454 ff., 471 ff., 486 ff., 534 ff., 604 ff., 660 ff., 683 ff., 711 ff.

20 Ibid., p. 711.

21 U. N. Docs. A/C.1/SR. 99, p. 18, and A/C.1/SR. 102, p. 7.

22 U. N. Doc. A/C.1/SR. 102, p. 2.

23 U. N. Doc. S/P.V./190, p. 89.

24 United Nations. Rules of Procedure of the General Assembly, XIII. Admission of New Members to the United Nations, Rules 113-116; Provisional Rules of Procedure of the Security Council, Rules 58-60.

25 For a concise review of the applications for membership, see Annual Report of the Secretary General on the Work of the Organization: July 1, 1947-June 30, 1948, pp. 42-45 and 106. See also Kerno, Ivan’s speech to the International Court of Justice on April 22, 1948, I.C.J. Pleadings, 1948 (Leyden; A. W. Sijthoff’s Publishing Co., 1948), pp. 48-52 Google Scholar.

26 U. N. Doc. A/C.1/SR.98, p. 1.

27 Report of the Committee of Procedure for the Admission of New Members. U. N. Docs. A/384 and S/P.V./197, pp. 16-68.

28 U. N. Doc. S/P.V./197, p. 68.

29 Provisional Rules of Procedure of the Security Council (Adopted by the Security Council at ita First Meeting and amended at its 138th meeting, June 4, 1947; 197th meeting, Aug. 28, 1947). U. N. Doc. S/96/Rev. 3, p. 15.

30 U. N. Doc. S/P.V./197, p. 91. But cf. text of Resolution 40(1) of Dec. 13, 1946, U. N. Docs. A/235 and A/64/Add. 1, p. 826.

31 Report of the Secretary General, 1947-1948, p. 43.

32 U. N. Doc. A/P.V./83, p. 41. Cf. U.N.C.I.O. Documents, Vol. XI, pp. 306, 317, 475, 493, 663.

33 U. N. Doc. A/P.V./83, pp. 56-61. Syria had also pointed out in the Security Council, Aug. 21, 1947, that the final decision belonged to the Assembly. U. N. Doc. S/P.V./190, p. 26.

34 U. N. Doc. A/P.V./85, pp. 26-30.

35 Loc. cit.

36 U. N. Doc. A/C.1/SR.98, pp. 2 f.

37 Cf. Joint Proposal of Argentina, Brazil, and Chile: they were “peace-loving countries who are able and willing to carry out the obligations contained in the Charter.” U. N. Doc. A/C.l/243.

38 U. N. Docs. A/C.1/SR.98, p. 6, and A/C.1/SR.100, p. 5.

39 U. N. Doc. A/C.1/SR.99, p. 10.

40 U. N. Doc. A/C.1/SR.100, pp. 7 f.

41 U. N. Docs. A/C.1/SR.99, pp. 1-3, 18; A/C.1/SR.102, pp. 3, 6 f.

42 U. N. Doc. A/C.1/SR.99, pp. 5 ff. Cf. U. S., ibid., p. 12; Venezuela, U. N. Doc. A/C.l/SR.100, p. 6; Paraguay, Ibid., p. 7; China, U. N. Doc. A/C.1/SR.101, pp. 1 f.; Mexico, Ibid., p. 6; United Kingdom, ibid., pp. 7-9: the Council would not be bound, however, by the Assembly’s vote; Brazil, Ibid., p. 11; Norway and Panama, ibid.; France, U. N. Doc. A/C.1/SR.102, p. 2; Philippine Bepublic, ibid., p. 6; Canada, U. N. Doc. A/C.1/SR.103, p. 5.

43 U. N. Docs. A/C.1/8B.100, pp. 1-4, and A/C.1/SR.103, p. 5.

44 Poland, U. N. Doc. A/P.V./117, p. 131 : action by the Assembly without previous recommendation is illegal; U.S.S.R., ibid., p. 151; Iraq, U. N. Doc. A/P.V./118, p. 2; and Argentina, Ibid., p. 41 : “ Whatever was in the minds of those who met in Washington, in Dumbarton Oaks or in San Francisco at the time of the San Francisco Conference is not relevant. What we must do is read the Charter and interpret it in the light of the purposes of the Charter and not in the light of the individual hopes of given countries, which countries, of course, from the point of view of their national interests, want other countries to do as they desire and not as the majority of countries would desire.”

45 United Nations. Rules of Procedure of the General Assembly, XIII. Admission of New Members to the United Nations. U. N. Doc. A/520, p. 23.

46 U. N. Doc. A/P.V./118, p. 62.

47 U. N. Doc. A/P.V./117, p. 147. Cf. I.C.J”. Reports, 1947-1948, p. 58.

48 Report of the Secretary General, 1947-1948, p. 43.

49 Ibid., pp. 43 f.

50 Loc. cit. and note 2, supra.

51 I.C.J. Pleadings, 1948, pp. 14, 15 f., 16 f., 17, 18, 18 f., 19 f., 20 f., 23-27, 27, 30-32, and 32 f., respectively.

52 Ibid. pp. 22 f., 29, and Ibid., respectively.

53 I.C.J. Pleadings, 1948, pp. 24 f.

54 Ibid., p. 55.

55 Ibid. pp. 78 f.

56 I.C.J. Pleadings, 1948, pp. 82 f. Poland and Czechoslovakia said the question was political rather than legal. (Ibid., pp. 112 and 117 f.)

57 Ibid., p. 97 f.

58 Admission of a State to the United Kations (Charter, Art. 4), Advisory Opinion, I.C.J. Reports, 1947-1948, pp. 57-119, at p. 65; this JOUBNAL, Vol. 42 (1948), p. 927.

59 I.C.J. Beporte, 1947-1948, p. 64.

60 I.C.J. Reports, 1947-1948, pp. 84 f., 87, 90. See also the dissenting opinion of Judge Zoričić, Ibid., pp. 98-102, at p. 100: “It is quite clear that the Committee [II/l] took special care that the Assembly should have a discretionary power at the moment when it decides, on the recommendation of the Council, whether a new Member shall be admitted or not.”

61 Report of the Secretary General, 1947-1948, p. 44; United Nations Bulletin Vol. V. No. 5 (Sept. 1, 1948), pp. 705 f.

62 I.C.J. Reports, 1947-1948, pp. 92 f. and 101 ff. Cf. written statements of Yugoslavia, the Ukraine, and the U.S.S.R., and the oral statements of Yugoslavia, Poland, and Czechoslovakia, cited supra.