the words "made by an affirmative vote of seven members" in the proposed text of Chapter V, Section B, paragraph 4, of the Dumbarton Oaks Proposals as adopted by Committee II/1 on May 25, 1945 (3) Recommendation of the Executive Committee that the Steering Committee recommend to Committee 1/2 that it should reconsider its decision of May 24 to omit mention in Chapter X of the Dumbarton Oaks Proposals regarding the Secretariat of the positions of deputy secretaries-general. In connection with this recommendation the Executive Committee agreed that if a delegation desires that a particular text, whether an amendment or an amendment to an amendment, be put to the vote, that delegation should have the right to have the text voted on even though it may seem that a general proposition which has already been voted upon covers the subject in question (4) Recommendation of the Executive Committee that the Steering Committee recommend to Committee I/2 that it reconsider the proposed text of Chapter V, Section B, paragraph 3, of the Dumbarton Oaks Proposals, adopted May 25, 1945, from which the provision for expulsion was omitted; in so doing Committee I/2 should adhere to the usual rules of procedure in order to remove the uncertainty felt by some of its members in connection with the vote previously taken on this issue (5) Recommendation of the Executive Committee that the Steering Committee recommend that the proposed text of Chapter V, Section B, paragraph 8, of the Dumbarton Oaks Proposals, as adopted by Committee II/2 on May 30, 1945, be referred back to that Committee for consultation by it with Committee III/1, and if necessary or desirable with Committee III/3, in order that there be prepared a jointly agreed upon redraft of the paragraph under reference which relates to the matter of receipt and consideration by the General Assembly of reports of the Security Council. Summary Report of Sixth Meeting of the Doc. 893, June 9 The Chairman recognized the Chairman of the Delegation of Denmark, who had expressed a desire to address the Steering Committee. Mr. Kauffmann (Denmark) expressed his appreciation for the welcome which had been accorded him and the Danish Delegation at the meeting of the Steering Committee on June 7, when the Delegation took its seat at the Committee. He spoke of his personal feelings when he visited Denmark shortly after its liberation and was sure that the feelings of his countrymen at home were no less deep when they learned of the invitation extended to the Danish Government to participate in this Conference. Mr. Kauffmann said that his first appearance at the Steering Committee on June 7 came at a happy moment when the agreement of the four sponsoring governments and France regarding voting procedure was announced, and he was confident that this agreement would help speed the Conference toward a successful conclusion. The views of his Delegation on the work of the Conference, Mr. Kauffmann said, coincide largely with those already expressed by the Delegation of Norway and others. Like everyone else, he continued, the Danish Delegation hoped the Charter would be as perfect as humanly possible; he also wished to emphasize the even greater importance of the way in which the document will be used. He concluded his remarks by expressing the satisfaction of the Danish Government that it had earned a place in the United Nations and trusted that Denmark might thoroughly justify the confidence placed in it. Field Marshal Smuts (Union of South Africa) was next recognized by the Chairman. The Field Marshal said he wished to speak on the state of the Conference work. The announcement regarding the agreement on the voting procedure among the four sponsoring governments and France, he said, had removed the last important hurdle and made it possible for the Conference to come to a successful conclusion. Very few points still remain unsettled, the Field Marshal said, and most of them are connected with the question of the veto; because that question is now settled, it is possible for the committees to proceed with their work and dispose of these few remaining points. In view of the time that has already elapsed, he believed the Conference should move forward rapidly with the completion of committee and commission meetings which would then have to be followed by a few days of final work on the Charter itself. The Field Marshal pointed out that some time ago it had been hoped that the Conference could be concluded by June 6, and that this date had later been advanced to June 15. In view of the large amount of time required for the completion of meetings to be held, the Field Marshal urged the utmost expedition and the avoidance of lengthy debates and discussions, particularly in commission meetings. Otherwise, he pointed out, it might again be necessary to postpone the closing date of the Conference and additional delegates might find it necessary to leave before the final session at which all wish to do honor to the President of the United States. Mr. Padilla (Mexico) expressed his support of the views of Field Marshal Smuts and said he shared the Field Marshal's optimism concerning the success of the Conference. In view of the tremendous importance of the task in which the Conference is engaged, and the state of expectancy of the people of all participating countries, he urged redoubled efforts toward the speedy and successful conclusion of this great task which has been entrusted to the delegates. Mr. Fraser (New Zealand) said that he was sure all would agree with Field Marshal Smuts and Mr. Padilla but believed it was important to put the situation in its proper perspective. The committees have worked very hard, he said, many of them have had to wait for the sponsoring governments to make up their minds about the voting procedure, and now that the road-block has been removed the committees can get on with their work. The committees, he continued, are anxious to get on with their work and he suggested the possibility that the Chairman might have to caution the delegates against too rapid work lest they sacrifice thoroughness against which the Chairman himself had warned on a previous occasion. Mr. Gallagher (Peru) observed that the twelve committees of the Conference had been established in order to facilitate the work of the Conference and to save time. The agenda for the meeting today, he said, proposed that the Steering Committee take up four questions which come from various committees, each of which is made up of representatives of all delegations. He felt that the important thing was to enable these committees to proceed with their work and there fore moved that the four remaining points on the agenda be referred, without further discussion in the Steering Committee, to the four respective technical committees. The Delegate of Haiti seconded the motion. Mr. Evatt (Australia) said he thought the course suggested by Mr. Gallagher a convenient one, but that he also thought the delegates should understand how these matters got on the agenda for the Steering Committee meeting. All the points on the agenda, he said, had been considered in technical committees by the representatives of all delegations. The four sponsoring governments had then, because of procedural points or because there was some suggestion of confusion in the committees, referred those matters to the Executive Committee, which in turn had recommended action to the Steering Committee as set forth on the agenda. None of these recommendations, he pointed out, dealt with the substance of the matter, but with questions of form. Mr. Evatt expressed strong support for the remarks of Mr. Fraser and wished to forestall any possible reflection on the work of the delegates in the technical committees who had labored hard and long and to whose efforts the greatest credit for the work of the Conference must be given. These delegates in these committees still have work to do, he pointed out, even in regard to a subject such as the voting procedure in the Security Council, despite the fact the four sponsoring governments and France have come to agreement. Mr. Evatt said he supported the motion made by Mr. Gallagher of Peru and pointed out that each item on the agenda could be debated at length in the Steering Committee in view of the many problems of procedure and policy which were involved in them. He stated that he hoped that the Steering Committee would act on the advice of the Executive Committee and refer the questions on the agenda directly to the technical committees. The Chairman stated that the Delegates of Belgium and the Philippine Commonwealth had expressed a desire to speak and reminded the meeting that a motion was before it to refer the four remaining subjects on the agenda to the appropriate committees. Mr. de Schryver (Belgium) said he believed that the motion made. by the Delegate of Peru could be approved, but he believed that it was necessary to clarify one point. Item 4 on the agenda, he said, contains the following: "Committee 1/2 should adhere to the usual rules of procedure in order to remove the uncertainty felt by some of its members in connection with the vote previously taken on this issue." In the opinion of the Belgian Delegation, he said, the vote taken in Committee 1/2 was not in accordance with the rules because there were no very definite rules, but in accordance with the suggestions and guiding principles made to the committees by the Secretariat. To avoid the same situation arising again, he asked the Chairman to explain the usual rules of procedure. The Chairman referred to a memorandum of June 8 on suggestions for voting on questions of substance, which had been distributed at the meeting, and asked the Secretary-General to explain its provisions. The Secretary-General (Mr. Hiss) stated that in a memorandum dated May 13, and marked EX-SEC/8, the Secretariat suggested certain rules of procedure which might be followed in committee and commission proceedings. In recent meetings of the Executive Committee, he said, it had been brought out that on at least one point the memorandum was not clear, or, if it was clear, it was unsatisfactory to various delegations, and that is on the question of how a committee should proceed when the substance of a motion is to delete words from the Dumbarton Oaks Proposals. One of the delegates had suggested a clarification of this matter; accordingly the Secretariat had drawn up the memorandum of June 8 to which the Chairman had referred. The Secretary-General said he would not suggest that the meeting vote on this memorandum today but requested that the delegates give it their consideration and forward any comments or suggestions they might have to the Secretariat. The Chairman asked the Delegate of Belgium whether he found the Secretary-General's explanation satisfactory. Mr. de Schryver replied that he understood that the explanation of the Secretary-General was provisional until the final text had been seen and studied and that if the Secretary-General agreed with this, the latter's statement was satisfactory to the Belgian Delegation. The Secretary-General agreed. Mr. Evatt said he wished to point out in fairness to Mr. Rolin, President of Commission I, that there was a substantial body of opinion on the part of the members of the Executive Committee that his action in Committee I/2 was correct. Brigadier General Romulo (Philippine Commonwealth) asked for the question to be stated. The Chairman restated the motion, namely that all remaining items on the agenda, as recommended by the Executive Committee, be referred by the Steering Committee without further discussion to the appropriate technical committees, as recommended by the Executive Committee. This motion was adopted by a unanimous vote. Mr. Loudon (Netherlands) said that he was anxious to avoid in the future lengthy debates on procedural matters such as had taken place in the Executive Committee recently and, therefore, asked for a ruling of the Chair on the following matter. The Steering Committee, he said, was being asked to decide that the mode of voting in the Security Council on the recommendation of the Assembly on a candidate for Secretary-General be reconsidered by Committee III/1. If Committee III/1 upholds the decision of Committee II/1, he continued, no complications will arise. If, however, Committee III/1 decides that the Secretary-General will be appointed by the General Assembly upon a recommendation of seven members of the Security Council with the permanent members concurring, such a decision would have an important bearing upon decisions reached by Committee I/2 concerning the duration of the term of office and eligibility for reappointment of the Secretary-General and the decision reached by Committee II/1 concerning the mode of voting in the General Assembly with regard to the election of the Secretary-General. Therefore, he said, if Committee III/1 should reverse the decision of Committee II/1, the Netherlands Delegation wished to reserve the right to request the competent technical committees to review the situation in the light of such decisions. Therefore, in order to save time he requested the permission of the Chair to give notice, based on Doc. 42, Section B, paragraph 1, dated May 6, 1945, that the Netherlands Delegation may have to submit to the Steering Committee the question of the review by the competent technical committees of the following matters upon which decisions have already been reached: 1. the duration of the term of office of the Secretary-General; The Chairman replied that it was clear under the circumstances stated that it would be entirely proper for the Chairman of the Netherlands Delegation to raise the questions in the Steering Committee. The Chairman pointed out in response to a comment of Mr. Jiménez (Panama) that the motion just passed provided for the resubmission of the matters on the agenda to the appropriate technical committees, not necessarily to the committees from which they came. The Chairman also observed that the agenda indicated the technical committees to which the questions were being referred, under the motion adopted earlier in the meeting. No objection was voiced to the Chairman's ruling. Summary Report of Ninth Meeting of the Doc. 1063, June 18 The Chairman informed the Committee that it had been called into session at the request of the Chairman of the Delegation of the Soviet Union. Ambassador Gromyko (U.S.S.R.) read the text of paragraph 1, Section B, Chapter V, functions of the General Assembly, as adopted by Committee II/2, which gave the Assembly the right to discuss "any matter within the sphere of international relations". This paragraph, he said, in its attempt at liberalism, concealed an element of danger to the effectiveness of the Organization as a whole, in that it made it possible for any country to raise for discussion in the General Assembly any act of another country which it did not like. For example, he pointed out, a country could object to the immigration policy or the tariff system of another country and could raise these matters for discussion in the General Assembly on the grounds that they came "within the sphere of international relations", despite the fact that they were clearly matters of domestic jurisdiction. The present form of Chapter V, Section B, paragraph 1, made possible, Mr. Gromyko said, direct infringement on the sovereignty of the member nations of the Organization. Furthermore, Mr. Gromyko said, such discussions would strain the relations between states in contradiction to the cooperative purposes of the Organization. The Soviet Delegation, Mr. Gromyko stated, considered the formula adopted by Committee II/2 as undesirable. He agreed that the Assembly should have the right to discuss any matter relating to the maintenance of international peace and security but this did not mean granting the broad authority given in the present language of Chapter V, Section B, paragraph 1. Opportunity for the Organization to cooperate for the removal of causes of war had been provided, he maintained, in other paragraphs on the functions of the Assembly and in Chapter IX of the Charter dealing with the Economic and Social Council. The Soviet Delegation, therefore, recommended that the Executive Committee recommend to the Steering Committee that it refer this |