Senator JOHNSON of California. You and I were agreeing beautifully, and now you fix on some period in the future.

The CHAIRMAN. We would have to agree to the terms even then. I love to be in agreement with the Senator, but I find it quite difficult sometimes.

Senator JOHNSON of California. Often.

The CHAIRMAN. I was very happy when we found ourselves in complete agreement a moment ago. If it is satisfactory, I will withdraw anything that is not in agreement.

Senator JOHNSON of California. You cannot have great faith in your views if you are willing to withdraw them.

The CHAIRMAN. We would have to consent to the terms under which such territories would go in trusteeship, which means that we keep the control in our hands.

Senator JOHNSON of California. That is it, exactly..

The CHAIRMAN. Proceed, Dr. Pasvolsky.

Mr. PASVOLSKY. I think that what has been said covers the main points.

Senator LA FOLLETTE. Doctor, will you tell me how you envision the process by which subsequent agreements mentioned in paragraph 2 of article 77 would be arrived at? Would that be through the functioning of the Organization, or would it be as a result of individual agreements made perhaps bilaterally between nations that might be interested in particular territories?

Senator JOHNSON of California. Will you read the article to which you refer?

Senator LA FOLLETTE. Paragraph 2 of article 77 says that [reading]:

It will be a matter for subsequent agreement as to which territories in the foregoing categories will be brought under the trusteeship system and upon what terms.

Mr. PASVOLSKY. Senator, there would be agreements concluded among the states directly concerned.

The CHAIRMAN. Have you any other questions, Sepator?
Senator LA FOLLETTE. No.

The CHAIRMAN. "Proceed, Doctor.

Senator GREEN. May I ask a question in that connection?
The CHAIRMAN. Senator Green.

Senator GREEN. In article 75 it speaks of territories which may be placed under international authority by subsequent individual agreements. Does that mean agreements between individual nations and the Organization, or between different individual nations?

Mr. PASVOLSKY. The word "individual" here, Senator, applies to the territory. That is, there will be an agreement covering each territory, and the agreements would be concluded among the states directly concerned.

Senator GREEN. An agreement between the individual nations and the Organization?

Mr. PASVOLSKY. There would be agreements concluded between the individual nations, subject to approval by the Organization, if the Organization is to take over the function. The final arrangement would be an agreement approved by the Organization.

Senator GREEN. And all the individual nations affected?

Mr. PASVOLSKY. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. Proceed.

Mr. PASVOLSKY. Chapter XIV relates to the International Court of Justice. May I suggest that we defer that?

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Hackworth, who was in charge of that matter under our general supervision, is to be a witness and will be called later. I suggest that it might be better to hear him first on that, rather than Dr. Pasvolsky, if that is agreeable to the committee. Without objection, you may pass on, Doctor.

Mr. PASVOLSKY. Chapter XV relates to the Secretariat. The Secretariat of this proposed Organization will be a very important affair, more important that was the case with the League of Nations. The Secretary General will not only be the chief administrative officer of the Organization-that is, he will be responsible for the management of the Organization-but he will also act in the capacity of Secretary General in all meetings of the General Assembly and of the three Councils established under the Organization. There will be a unified control.

In addition to that, the Secretary General is given the right to bring to the attention of the Security Council any matters which in his opinion may threaten the maintenance of international peace and security. That is a very important political function which the Secretary General of the League did not possess.

The Secretary General will be appointed by the General Assembly on the recommendation of the Security Council. As the chief administrative officer of the Organization he will be responsible for providing the necessary staff; that is, he would appoint such a staff, but under regulations to be established by the General Assembly.

Senator BARKLEY. If the Secretary General should be nominated. and elected by the Assembly on the recommendation of the Security Council, would that mean that the General Assembly could reject a recommendation by the Security Council, in which event the Security Council would be required to suggest somebody else?

Mr. PASVOLSKY. That is right, Senator.

Then there are provisions here which make possible the eventual construction of an international civil service that would be loyal to the Organization, would not be under the orders of individual governments, and would be employed on the basis of competence and ability.

Those are the provisions for the Secretariat. Obviously, when the Organization is established, the rules and regulations will amplify, as usual, the operations of the Secretariat and of the Secretary General,

The CHAIRMAN. May I observe right there that originally it was provided that there should be four assistant secretaries general. There was some complaint about that, on the ground that the permanent members of the Security Council would each control one of these deputy secretaries general and thus exercise too much control over the Secretariat of the Organization. So we changed that provision and did not designate any specific number. Nor did we designate them as assistant secretaries general, but left it to the Secretary General to appoint his staff under the general regulations prescribed in the Charter.

Senator GEORGE. Doctor, may I ask if there is any provision in the Charter for the removal of the Secretary General?

Mr. PASVOLSKY. No, Senator.

Senator GEORGE. Is he elected or selected for any specified term? Mr. PASVOLSKY. That is left open now and will be determined by the Organization itself.

Senator GEORGE. By the General Assembly?

Mr. PASLOVSKY. Yes, sir. The General Assembly will lay down the rules.

The CHAIRMAN. Under the general authority, though, of the Security Council, would they not have power to remove him at any time? Mr. PASVOLSKY. I doubt it, as long as there is no provision for removal. There could be a regulation written which would provide for removal, I suppose.

Senator GEORGE. The General Assembly, I suppose, could do that. I was simply asking whether there were any express provisions made for removal or for termination of the tenure of office. The Charter contemplates him as a continuing officer?

Mr. PASLOVSKY. That is right, but not necessarily as an officer who will continue indefinitely.

Senator GEORGE. I understand. He would still be subject to the general control of the governing body?

Mr. PASVOLSKY. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. At this point I would like to say that originally his term was limited. He could be reelected, but on account of the desire for continuity we changed that fixed term, thinking it would tend more to harmony in the Organization if he were a permanent officer. The CHAIRMAN. All right, Doctor, you may proceed.

Mr. PASVOLSKY. Senator, the next chapter, chapter XVI, relates to a series of miscellaneous provisions, some of which are of very great importance.

First of all, there is a provision that every treaty entered into by any Member of the United Nations after the present Charter comes into force must be registered with the Secretariat and must be published by the Secretariat.

Senator GEORGE. It says "every international agreement."

Mr. PASVOLSKY. Yes, sir.

Senator GEORGE. Does that contemplate something less than a treaty? An executive agreement, for instance?

Mr. PASVOLSKY. Yes, it contemplates that all agreements which are of any importance should be registered.

The second paragraph states that a treaty or an agreement which has not been registered in accordance with the provisions of paragraph 1 may not be invoked before any organ of the United Nations. That is the sanction against nonregistration.

Senator BURTON. As I understand it, it has no application to agreements or treaties made before this Charter comes into effect? They will not be registered anywhere?

Mr. PASVOLSKY. There is no obligation to register those treaties or agreements. But presumably they will be registered.

Senator BURTON. But it is contemplated that they will be registered all at the same place?

Mr. PASVOLSKY. Yes. Presumably the whole League of Nations' registration would be taken over. Agreements, as you know, were

registered with the League. That is one of the problems in connection with the possible transfer of certain activities and assets of the League.

The next article provides that if there is a conflict between the obligations of the Members of the United Nations under this Charter and their obligations under any other international agreements, their obligations under this Charter shall prevail. That of course is selfevident and of very great importance.

The next article provides that the

Organization shall enjoy in the territory of each of its Members such legal capacity as may be necessary for the exercise of its functions and the fulfillment of its purposes.

This provision relates to the type of agreements the Organization may enter into, whether or not it can purchase supplies, and so on. This provision is left flexible in order to make it possible to require the minimum of legal capacity for those purposes, rather than to try to expand it.

Finally, the last article of this chapter provides for the extension of privileges and immunities to the Organization by the Members in their territories. That is customary for an organization of this character, but just what kind of privileges and immunities would be extended would be a matter for future determination. The General Assembly is given the power to make recommendations with a view to determining the details of the application of this provision.

Senator MILLIKIN. In connection with this immunity, I believe that the subject of investigations has already been touched upon and you said you were going to come back to it. I hoped you would come back to it and tell us the powers of the Council and of the Assembly with reference to investigations.

The CHAIRMAN. The Economic and Social Council?

Senator MILLIKIN. Senator Thomas yesterday touched upon the subject and you said you would come back to it.

Mr. PASVOLSKY. You see, the word "investigation" is not mentioned in connection with the Assembly. The word "investigation" is mentioned in connection with the Security Council, and it is mentioned there in the terms of a specific objective—that is, the Council has the power to investigate a dispute or situation in order to determine whether or not its continuance is likely to endanger the maintenance of international peace and security. The Assembly is given the right to make studies, to initiate studies, and therefore presumably to investigate in a technical sense the matters which come up before it.

I suppose your question relates to how much the Organization can investigate inside of a country?

Senator MILLIKIN. That is right.

Mr. PASVOLSKY. Obviously it can do what the governments themselves are willing for it to do.

Senator MILLIKIN. Under the Charter, is it intended that the government shall allow them to pursue their investigations wherever their investigations may take them?

Mr. PASVOLSKY. I should think that that would depend upon the procedure and upon the circumstances of the time. I do not think there is a blanket authorization such as you suggest implied anywhere. Senator MILLIKIN. Assuming any Member nation that did not want

to be investigated, could it deny the right of investigation without violating the Charter?

Mr. PASVOLSKY. I do not know how to answer that question, Senator, because I think the case would rest on the reason why a country opposes the investigation.

Senator MILLIKIN. Then each nation, according to your answer, would be the judge as to whether an investigation shall be carried on within its borders?

Mr. PASVOLSKY. If an investigation is carried on for a purpose which is within the province of the particular organ of the Organization, I should think that a country which interposed difficulties in the conduct of that investigation would not be considered as living up to its obligation under the Charter.

Senator MILLIKIN. Let me put it to you this way: Will each country have the right to question in an effective way and be the judge itself as to whether or not an investigation shall be had within its borders?

Mr. PASVOLSKY. Well, Senator, I should say that that would depend upon the circumstances of each particular case.

Senator MILLIKIN. Who would judge the circumstances?

Mr. PASVOLSKY. The circumstances would have to be judged as a part of the relationship of each Member state to the Organization. After all, the Organization will have the right to judge that a particular country is obstructing it in the performance of its duties. Now, the Organization may decide that a country is perfectly justified in not permitting an investigation of a certain character within its borders, or it may decide otherwise.

Senator MILLIKIN. I am speaking in terms of right under the Charter. Would any nation have the right to block an investigation which had been ordered by either the Assembly or by the Council?

Senator AUSTIN. Mr. Chairman, may I call the witness' attention to chapter I, article 2, paragraph 5, and ask him if that was intended by the Conference to cover this point?

Mr. PASVOLSKY. The first part of that sentence reads:

All Members shall give the United Nations every assistance in any action it takes in accordance with the present Charter, and shall refrain—

et cetera.

Senator MILLIKIN. Then it would be a violation of the Charter if any nation did not permit investigations to be made within its borders that had been ordered by the Assembly or the Council; is that correct?

Mr. PASVOLSKY. It would be judged by the Organization itself as to whether or not such an action constitutes failure to live up to the commitment to give every assistance in any action taken in accordance with this Charter.

The CHAIRMAN. Isn't it a fact that we are constantly sending missions abroad to study all of those social and economic questions nowagriculture, health, labor, and many others?

Mr. PASVOLSKY. Of course we are.

The CHAIRMAN. And other nations are sending them here without any molestation or without any objection on our part? If they undertook activities that would be in violation of our domestic laws they could be ousted. If we did not want them to come in we could refuse them passports. But as long as the investigations are within the terms of the Charter, and they behave themselves, I do not see that we are en