Wport by the Secretary-General in Pursuance of Resolution 269 (1969) Adopted by The: Security Council at Its 1497331 Meetixg On
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
WPORT BY THE SECRETARY-GENERAL IN PURSUANCE OF RESOLUTION 269 (1969) ADOPTED BY THE: SECURITY COUNCIL AT ITS 1497331 MEETIXG ON 12 AUGUST 1969 CONCERNING TH3 SITUATION IN NAMIBIA 1, This report is submitted to the Security Council in pursuance of the request tnade to the Secretary-General by the Council in paragraph 3 of resolution 269 (1369) "to follow closely the implementation of the present resolution and to report to the Security Council as soon as possible". 2. The operative paragraphs of resolution 263 (lg@) read as follows: “1. Reaffirms its resolution 264 (1969); "2 . Condemns the Government of South Africa for its refusal to comply with resolution 264. (l$c)) and for its persistent defiance of the authority of the United Nations; “3 . Decides that the continued occupation of the territory 0% Mamibia by the SoaEican authorities constitutes an aggressive encroachment on the authority OP the United Nations, a violation of the territorial integrity and a denial of the political sovereignty of the people of Namibia; “4 D Recognizes the legitimacy of the struggle of the people of Namibia against the illegal presence of the South African authorities in the territory; lfr 2. Calls upon the Government of South Africa to withdraw its administration from the territory immediately and in any case before 11.October 1969; "6. Decides that in the event of failure on the part of the South African Government to comply with the provisions of the preceding paragraph of the present resolution, the Security Council will meet immediately to determine upon effective measures in accordance with the appropriate provisions of the relevant Chapters of the United Nations Charter; “7 . Calls upon all States to refrain fram all dealings with the Government of South Africa purporting to act on behalf of the territory of Namibia; 1.. 69-21929 / S/9463 English Page 2 "6. Requests all States to increase their moral and material assistance to the peqle of lvlamibia in their struggle against foreign occupation; "9. Requests the Secretary-General to follow closely the implementation of the present resolution and to report to the SeCUrity Council as SOOB as possible; "10, Decides to remain actively seized of the matter." 3. Immediately upon the adoption of the resolution by the Security Council on 12 August 1969, the Secretary-General transmitted its text by telegram to the Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of South Africa. 4. In a note dated 28 August 1.969 the Secretary-General transmitted the text of resolution 269 (1969) t o all States Members of the United Nations or members of the specialized agencies, drawing particular attention to operative paragraphs 7 and 8 wherein the Council called upon all States to refrain from all dealings with the Government of South Africa purporting to act on behalf of the territory of Namibia, and requested them to increase their moral and material assistance to the people of Namibia in their struggle against foreign occupation. 5* In a letter dated 26 September 1969, the Minister of Foreign Affairs of South Africa replied to the Secretary-General's telegram of 12 August, (The text of the letter from the Minister of Foreign Affairs, together with its annexes, is reproduced in annex I below.) 6. In response to his note of 28 August, the Secretary-General has, as of 3 October 1969, received acknowledgements from the Permanent Representatives of Burma, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Mauritania, the Philippines and the United Kingdom, as well as a reply from Kenya, the substantive portion of which is reproduced in annex II below. 7s Further reports by the Secretary-General on this question will be issued as relevant information is received. / . I.. / REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA MINISTRY OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS PRETORIA 26 September, 1969. Your Excellency, I acknowledge the receipt of your telegram of 12th August, 1969, conveying to me the text ‘Iof a resolution adopted by the Securi*y Council at its 1497th Meeting” on that day. I have on former occasions made it clear that the South African Government has no doubt that General Assembly Resolution 2145( XXI) of 2?th October 1964 is invalid. This resolution forms the basis of subsequent United Nations re- solutions, including those of the Security Council; and the reasons advanced by the South African Government con- testing the validity of those resolutions therefore apply with equal force to the latest. I am bound to insist that the South African Govern,ment has not yet learnt in what respects Its arguments, or the conclusions which flow from those arguments, are legally Inadequate. Moreover , the substance of all the resolutions, including the latest re- solution of the Security Council, remains wholly unrealistic and without justification In fact and in law. II/...... His Excellency U Thant, Secretary-General of the United Nations, NEW YORK 2. I accordingly propose to deal briefly with some of the more substantive legal and factual aspects of Security Council Resolution No. 269(1969). Illegallty of Resolution As far as paragraph 2 is concerned, it should be apparent that the South African Government cannot reason- ably be criticised for declining to comply with a demand, nor for defying an authority both of which, as I shall show below, are illegally asserted. This applies also to asser- tions in other paragraphs of the Resolution. At the outset I must reaffirm that it is invalid and misleading to endeavour to rely on South Africa’s alleged “disavowal of the Mandate” in claiming for the JJnited Nations a right of cancellation of the Mandate. It has repeatedly been shown that the question whether there existed any supervisory power after the demise of tne League can be determined independently of the question whether the Mandate has lapsed or is still legally in force. South Africa has also consistently stated that it would continue to administer South West Africa in the spirit of the principles laid down in the Mandate. In any event, for the Purposes of this reply the Mandate can be assumed to have survived the League of Nations. In/..... 3. Tn accepting the Mandate, South Africa undertook an ohligation to report and give account to a speclflc organ nf the Zeague of Nations, namely, the Council of the League of Nations, whi,ch was to be assisted hy another specific organ, the Permanent Mandates Commission. The Council alone had the power to take decis?ons about Mandates, and to address recommendations to MandatoriPs. Art5cl.e 4 of tl~a Covenant entitled any Member of the League not repre- sel:ted on the Council “to send a representative to sit as ;I Member at any meeting of the CouncI.1 during the con- sideration of mutters specluLly affecting the interests of that FIemberff. This provision @nabLed a Mandatory to be represented when the Counci I considered matters relating to its own Mandate, as well as to Mandates in general, In terms of Article 5, decisions of the CounciS. required “the agreement of a11 Members of the League represented at the Meeting” - in other words, the unaniml ty ru1.e appl led. In terms of Article 22, paragraph 2, of the Cove- nant, the .f’unctIons of’ the Permanent Mandates Commissjon were “to receive and examine the annual reports of the Mandatories and to advise the Council on all matters re- lating to the observance of the Mandates”. In constituting the Permanent Mandates Commission it was provlllecl that - ltAl.l, the Members of the Commission shall be appointed by the Council and selected for their personal merit and/...,. 4. anU competence. They shall not hold any office which puts them in a position of direct dependence on their Governments while Members of the Commissionll. The Commission itself realised and stated that, having adopted the rule of tlabsolute independence end impar- tiality”., Its members should exercise their authority lfless 8s judges from whom critical pronouncements are expected, than as collaborators who are resolved to devote their ex- perience and their energies to a joint endeavour”. Supervision of the administration of the various Mandates by the Council of the League, acting with the as- sist;3nca of the Permanent Mandates Commission, continued from the inception of the Mandates system until the out- break of the Second World War, which brought about a cessa- tion of meetings of the Commission. Throughout this period South Africa regularly submitted annual reports concerning South West Africa to the League and accounted to the Council for its administration. Relations were cordial. In 1924 South Africa initiated the practice, which was commended by the Commission, of sending the Administrator of the Mandated Territory as its delegate to meetings of the Commission; and in 1935 the Marquis TheoUoli, the Commission’s Chairman, made a tour of South West Africa at the invitation of the South kfr1 can Govesnmen t , and afterwards published a sym- pathetic account of his impressions. In April 1946, after the Second World War, the League of Nations was dissolved. The/.... 5. The United Nations was established largely as a result of Allied co-operation during the Second WorlU War. The blue-print for the Organisation was prepared in lY&, in discussions at Dumbarton Oaks, Washington. These led to the calling of the conference of the United Nations at San Francisco in 1945. At this conference, attended by dsle- gates of 50 nations, the Charter of the United Nations was drafted, agreed and signed by a3.1 representatives. It came into force on 24th October, 1945. During these develop- ments the League of Nations was stfll in existence; and it continued to exist side by side with the new Organisation until April 1946, There was no suggestion that the United Nations was to be the League under a new name, or an auto- matic successor in law to League assets 9 obligations, func- tions or actlvi ties.