States was one of 16 sponsors, recommended the use of the UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules in the settlement of disputes arising from international commercial relations and requested the Secretary General to arrange for their widest possible distribution.

The second resolution, 7/sponsored by 10 states,

was an omnibus resolution which commended UNCITRAL on its work; noted with satisfaction the completion of the draft Convention on the Carriage of Goods by Sea, the adoption of the UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules, and the work of the Working Group on the International Sale of Goods; and recommended the UNCITRAL continue its work on the topics included in its program of work and maintain close collaboration with UNCTAD and other international organizations active in the field of international trade law. This resolution also took two decisions to facilitate the work of UNCITRAL: (1) it extended the term of office of the members of the Commission from the end of the year until the beginning of UNCITRAL's regular annual session in order to prevent the Working Groups, which generally meet in January and February, just before the plenary session, from being under strength in the years following elections; and (2) it authorized governments of states that are not members to attend the sessions of the Commission as observers.

The third resolution, 8/sponsored by 15 states,

decided to convene an international conference of plenipotentiaries in 1978 to consider the question of the carriage of goods by sea and to embody the results of its work in an international convention and such other instruments as it may deem appropriate.

HUMAN RIGHTS IN ARMED CONFLICTS

The 31st General Assembly allocated to its Sixth Committee the agenda item on "Respect for human rights in armed conflicts: report of the Secretary General." The Sixth Committee considered the item at six meetings between October 4 and October 12.

The Secretary General's report related to the proceedings and results of the third session of the Diplomatic Conference on the Reaffirmation and Development of International Humanitarian Law

7/ Resolution 31/99.

8/ Resolution 31/100.

Applicable in Armed Conflicts, convened by the Swiss Federal Council at Geneva from April 21 to June 11, 1976. That Conference was entrusted with the task of considering two draft Additional Protocols to the Geneva Conventions of 1949 for the Protection of War Victims, one concerning international armed conflicts and the other concerning noninternational armed conflicts, and the question of the possible prohibition or restriction of specific conventional weapons alleged to cause unnecessary suffering or to have indiscriminate effects.

During the third session of the Conference, its Committees adopted a number of draft articles on different aspects of the problem. Of particular interest to the United States were three draft articles affirming the right of families to know the fate of their relatives. These articles require each party to a conflict to search for persons who have been reported missing by an adverse party and to transmit information about them. They also provide that parties facilitate access to grave sites, the decent care of graves and, if desired, the return of the remains of the deceased to the home country.

Some of the difficult issues remaining for the conference at its fourth session are whether the scope of the protocols will include members of national liberation movements and mercenaries and whether the conference will be able to make progress on the prohibition or restriction of certain conventional weapons.

On October 5, Kenya introduced a draft resolution that was eventually sponsored by 21 states, most of them African or Western European. In two of its preambular paragraphs the draft (1) welcomed the substantial progress made at the third session of the Diplomatic Conference and (2) noted that the Conference would continue its consideration of the use of specific conventional weapons, including any which might be deemed to be excessively injurious or to have indiscriminate effects, and its search for agreement, for humanitarian reasons, on possible rules prohibiting or restricting the use of such weapons. In its most important operative paragraphs the draft (1) called upon all parties to armed conflicts to acknowledge and comply with their obligations under various international instruments and rules, including the 1899 and 1907 Hague Conventions, the 1925 Geneva Protocol, and the 1949 Geneva Conventions; (2) urged all participants in the Conference to do their utmost to reach agreement on additional rules to alleviate the suffering brought about by armed conflicts and to protect noncombatants, and to bring the Conference during its 1977

session to a successful conclusion; and (3) requested the Secretary General to report at the Assembly's 32nd session on relevant developments concerning human rights in armed conflicts, in particular on the proceedings and results of the fourth session of the Diplomatic Conference.

Speaking on October 6, the U.S. Representative, Mr. Rosenstock, reaffirmed the U.S. commitment to the development of international humanitarian law. He noted the progress achieved at the third session in a number of significant areas: a key compromise article identifying specific acts which are to be repressed as breaches of the Protocol concerning international conflicts; draft articles on the identification and protection of medical aircraft; and the updated procedural guarantees for the proper treatment of those claiming prisoner of war status. He said that the draft articles on the right of families to know the fate of their relatives were particularly important, the more so in the aftermath of armed conflicts throughout the world that have left the fate of many persons unknown. He called for the prompt and successful completion of the work of the conference.

On October 12, the Sixth Committee approved the draft resolution by consensus, and on November 24, the General Assembly

in plenary session also by consensus, adopted it

DRAFTING OF AN INTERNATIONAL CONVENTION
AGAINST THE TAKING OF HOSTAGES

In a letter dated September 28, 1976, the Federal Republic of Germany requested the inclusion in the 31st General Assembly's agenda of a new item entitled "Drafting of an international convention against the taking of hostages." On October 4, on the recommendation of its General (steering) Committee, the General Assembly decided to include the item and to allocate it to its Sixth Committee, which subsequently considered it at seven meetings between November 26 and December 10. Over 60 states took part in the debate.

On November 26, the Federal Republic of Germany introduced a draft resolution ultimately sponsored by 34 states (including the United States) which, inter alia, (1) recognized that the taking of hostages was "an act which must be denounced as absolutely intolerable and incompatible with universally accepted standards of human conduct"; (2) decided

9/ Resolution 31/19.

to establish an ad hoc committee to draft an international convention against the taking of hostages; and (3) requested the committee to draft a convention at the earliest possible date "on the basis that the taking of hostages should be condemned, prohibited, and punished and that persons who perpetrate such acts should be prosecuted or extradited for purpose of prosecution."

On November 30, Libya introduced amendments to the draft resolution which would have limited the prohibition on the taking of hostages to the taking of "innocent" hostages and which would have eliminated the requirement that the convention condemn the taking of hostages and oblige states to prosecute or extradite.

The debate on the item touched on the question whether some individuals could legitimately be held hostage because of their acts or the policies of their government. Those inclined to believe there might be some validity to this view urged the insertion of the word "innocent" before the word "hostages" throughout the resolution.

On November 29, the U.S. Representative, Mr. Rosenstock, noted the urgency of drafting a convention against the taking of hostages. Because no state could feel confident its citizens would not be kidnapped and because all member states were committed to the UN Charter, which affirms the fundamental dignity of all persons, he expressed the hope that all states would denounce the taking of hostages. He noted that hostages were always innocent persons since they were being held not for reasons relating to themselves but to demands on a third party. He said it would be at the least redundant and at most dangerously confusing to insert the word "innocent" before "hostages. He urged that the convention be based on the duty to prosecute or extradite, since such a duty followed naturally from the conclusion that the taking of hostages infringes on fundamental rights.

Following informal consultations, the Federal Republic of Germany introduced on December 9 on behalf of the cosponsors a compromise draft, ultimately sponsored by 38 states, that recognized that the taking of hostages "endangers innocent human lives," and decided to establish a 35-member ad hoc committee to draft at the earliest possible date an international convention against the taking of hostages. It excluded the notion of "innocent" hostages, however, and Libya did not press its amendment to the vote. Although the compromise resolution did not expressly require that the convention be drafted "on the basis that the taking of hostages

should be condemned, prohibited, and punished and that persons who perpetrate such acts should be prosecuted or extradited for purpose of prosecution," the United States cosponsored it because it constituted a meaningful request for action to combat the problem and did not contain any language to suggest that there were some causes or some motives that could be said to justify the taking of hostages.

The compromise resolution was approved in the Sixth Committee on December 10 and adopted by the Assembly in plenary session on December 15, both times by consensus.10/ The members of the ad hoc committee had not been appointed by the end of the year.

INTERNATIONAL TERRORISM

The item entitled "Measures to prevent international terrorism which endangers or takes innocent human lives or jeopardizes fundamental freedoms, and study of the underlying causes of those forms of terrorism and acts of violence which lie in misery, frustration, grievance and despair and which cause some people to sacrifice human lives, including their own, in an attempt to effect radical changes" once again on the agenda of the 31st General Assembly.

was

Proposed in 1972 by the Secretary General, the item was originally intended as a means to develop international measures to combat terrorism. To this end, the United States presented a draft convention against the spread of terrorism to individuals and countries not party to the conflict concerned. No action was taken on the U.S. draft and the General Assembly in 1972 established an ad hoc committee to study the problem of terrorism. However, the committee failed to produce any tangible results because of its inability to restrict its work to combatting terrorism. Instead, it devoted considerable time to discussing the causes of terrorism, state conduct, and the right of national liberation movements to achieve self-determination.

The report of the Ad Hoc Committee on International Terrorism, which met in 1973, was on the agenda of the 28th, 29th, and 30th sessions of the General Assembly, but each year action was deferred to the following session because of lack of time. The Sixth Committee of the 31st General Assembly considered the item briefly at six meetings between December 3 and 10, 1976.

10/ Resolution 31/103.