Article 2019

1. The Secretary-General of the United Nations shall receive and circulate to all States which are or may become Parties to this Convention reservations made by States at the time of ratification or accession. Any State which objects to the reservation shall, within a period of ninety days from the date of the said communication, notify the Secretary-General that it does not accept it.

2. A reservation incompatible with the object and purpose of this Convention shall not be permitted, nor shall a reservation the effect of which would inhibit the operation of any of the bodies established by this Convention be allowed. A reservation shall be considered incompatible or inhibitive if at least two thirds of the States Parties to this Convention object to it.

3. Reservations may be withdrawn at any time by notification to this effect addressed to the Secretary-General. Such notification shall take effect on the date on which it is received.

Article 21

A State Party may denounce this Convention by written notification to the Secretary-General of the United Nations. Denunciation shall

19 Regarding this article, the U.S. Representative, Frances E. Willis, made the following statement in the U.N. General Assembly on Dec. 21, 1965:

"Let me now turn very briefly to the question on the reservations article. My delegation believes that it would have been better for this convention not to contain an article on reservations. The absence of such an article need not have impaired the effectiveness of the convention. The omission of an article on reservations would, however, have made possible the acceptance by a greater number of states, thereby contributing to the eradication of racial discrimination over a wider area. We think it would have been preferable in this convention, if there had to be an article on reservations, for it to provide for a judicial decision on the question of whether a reservation made by a state was or was not compatible with the object and purpose of the convention.

"What I have said explains why we abstained from voting on the article contained in document A/L.479." (Department of State Bulletin, Feb. 7, 1966, p. 216.)

Document II-66

Report of the

Special Committee on the
Situation With Regard
to the Implementation
of the Declaration on the
Granting of Independence to
Colonial Countries and
Peoples, Approved
November 10, 1965 (Excerpt) 1

91. During the year the Special Committee continued to discharge the mandate entrusted to it by the General Assembly. At the commencement of its work the Chairman of the Special Committee noted with profound regret that the renewed hopes of freedom and independence without delay which were inspired in colonial peoples by the Declaration," on its adoption nearly five years ago, have with but a few exceptions not been realized. The Special Committee was aware that in refraining from setting a timelimit for the complete application of the Declaration to all colonial territories, it was the expectation of the General Assembly that immediate steps to that end would be taken in accordance with the freely expressed wishes of the peoples of these territories. Nevertheless, owing to the negative attitude and the deliberate non-co-operation of the administering Powers concerned, progress has not been made in the implementation of the Declaration in most of the Territories, notably the larger Territories in Africa, to which the Special Com

1 U.N. doc. A/6000, pars. 91-111. For the report as a whole, incorporating the chapters circulated separately as addenda, see doc. A/6000/Rev.1.

The Special Committee, often referred to as the Committee of 24, was established in 1961 as a Committee of 17 nations (see American Foreign Policy: Current Documents, 1961, pp. 171-172) and enlarged in 1962 to a membership of 24.

2 Text in American Foreign Policy: Current Documents, 1960, pp. 110-111.

mittee gave extensive consideration in previous years. The Special Committee also noted that concern in this regard had most recently been expressed in the resolutions adopted by the Council of Ministers of the Organization of African Unity at its fourth ordinary session held in Nairobi during February/March 1965.3

92. At the same time, the Special Committee took note of the limited constitutional progress that had taken place in a few of the Territories to which the Declaration applies and welcomed the attainment of independence by the Gambia on 18 February 1965. In doing so, the Special Committee recalled that the Gambia had been the subject of consideration and of a resolution adopted during September 1963 by which, inter alia, the Special Committee reaffirmed the right of the people of the Territory to selfdetermination

and independence

and declared that the provisions of resolution 1514 (XV) must be applied to the Gambia without delay.

93. The Special Committee wishes to report to the General Assembly that during 1965 it re-examined the situation regarding the implementation of the Declaration in a number of Territories to which it gave prolonged attention last year. In carrying out this review, the Special Committee was deeply concerned by the further deterioration, owing to recent developments, in the already grave situation prevailing in these Territories and by the increasingly serious threats to international peace and security which have therefore developed. As regards the remaining Territories, the Special Committee took note of the information contained in the working papers prepared by the Secretariat and decided to transmit this information to the General Assembly as a supplement to the relevant chapters of its report covering its work last year. The Special Committee's intention was to enable the

3 Feb. 26-Mar. 9, 1965.

• Cited in footnote 2 above.

General Assembly in considering that report to take into account the latest developments relating to the Territories concerned.

94. An important development affecting the Special Committee's work this year was its decision to accept invitations which were extended to it by the Governments of Ethiopia, the United Republic of Tanzania and Zambia, to hold meetings at their respective capitals." This decision was a reflection of the concern of the United Nations with colonial peoples generally, and was guided by the consideration that it was in Africa that the most difficult and serious colonial problems, as well as the largest number of people living under colonial rule, were to be found. The Special Committee was confident that by thus establishing direct contact with peoples under colonial rule in the continent, it would be in a better position to understand and therefore to assist them in their struggle for independence. It was also the hope of the Special Committee to facilitate the appearance before it of petitioners from colonial territories who would otherwise have found it virtually impossible to travel to New York.

95. At its meetings at the three capitals held between 25 May and 18 June 1965, the Special Committee considered the questions of Southern Rhodesia and South West Africa, the Territories under Portuguese administration, and Basutoland, Bechuanaland and Swaziland, and heard a large number of petitioners concerning these Territories as well as on Aden.

96. The situation in Southern Rhodesia, regarding which the Special Committee adopted a resolution prior to its visit to Africa,' continued to show serious deterioration. The elections held by the minority settler régime on the basis of the 1961 Constitution, which had previously been rejected by the majority of the people of the Territory, emboldened that régime to intensify its repressive measures against the African

A decision adopted by a vote of 20 to 3 (Australia, U.K., and U.S.), with 1 abstention (Denmark), May 5, 1965. (See U.N. docs. A/AC.109/L.196 and A/AC.109/SR. 331.)

At Lusaka, May 23-29, 1965; Dar-esSalaam, May 30-June 11, 1965; Addis Ababa, June 11-18, 1965.

1 Apr. 22, 1965; see post, docs. VIII-33 et seq.

majority, to further curtail democratic freedoms and political rights, to make threatening gestures towards neighbouring African States and to take steps in the direction of a unilateral declaration of independence. The Special Committee took note of the United Kingdom Government's adherence to its warning to the minority settler régime of the consequences of a unilateral declaration of independence," and of the search by that Government of an agreed solution of the problem of constitutional advance. In this connexion, the Special Committee recalled that the objectives outlined in its resolutions and those of the General Assembly and endorsed by the recent Security Council resolution on the question,' were the establishment by the United Kingdom of complete democratic freedom and equality of political rights in the Territory and the adoption, by means of a fully representative conference to be convened by the United Kingdom, of new constitutional arrangements based on universal adult suffrage, for independence at the earliest possible date. It was therefore a matter of great disappointment to the Special Committee that, while insisting on its exclusive responsibility for the constitutional progress of Southern Rhodesia, the United Kingdom Government has not taken effective steps for the attainment of the above-mentioned objectives. Having already drawn the attention of the Security Council to the extremely serious deterioration in the situation and its implications for peace and security in Africa, the Special Committee considers that measures must be taken without delay to secure the implementation of the Security Council's own resolution as well as those of the General Assembly and the Special Committee.

97. In Aden, the continued maintenance of the state of emergency and the carrying out of military operations, in disregard of the repeated demands of the General Assembly and the Special Committee, increased the tension in the area. While noting the United Kingdom Government's declared acceptance of the principles of self-determination and independence for South Arabia as set out in General Assembly resolution 1949 (XVIII) concern

$ See post, doc. VIII-37. See post, doc. VIII-34,

ing Aden,1o the Special Committee deplores the failure of that Government to apply the approach and methods outlined in that resolution, which, it may be noted, have received the widespread support of the political leaders in the Territory. The Special Committee also noted with deep regret that the United Kingdom continued its refusal to permit a visit to the Territory and its failure unequivocally to accept the recommendation contained in the above-mentioned resolution for a United Nations presence before and during the elections. At the same time, the United Kingdom Government has yet to make any moves towards the removal of its military base in Aden, although it has itself stated that no base is militarily or morally defensible unless it has the support of the people of the Territory in which it is situated. Further, recent developments have led to a sharp aggravation in the already serious situation prevailing in the Territory. The Special Committee wishes to reiterate its conviction that any hope of arresting the continuing deterioration in the situation and of moving towards a peaceful solution of the problem lies in the taking of immediate measures for the strict and complete implementation of the resolutions of the General Assembly and the Special Committee concerning the Territory.

98. With regard to the Territories under Portuguese administration, the Government of Portugal maintained its disregard of the obligation to transmit information under Article 73 e of the Charter and its attitude of non-co-operation with the Special Committee." Not merely did it fail to take any steps to implement the pertinent resolutions of the Security Council, the General Assembly and the Special Committee, but by pursuing its policies for the closer political and economic integration of the Territories with Portugal, it persisted in its flagrant defiance of these resolutions. Further, its repressive activities in the Territories were on the increase, and it intensified its military efforts to suppress the legitimate struggle of the African people for self-determination and independence. In this

10 Text in American Foreign Policy: Current Documents, 1963, pp. 593–594.

11 For the text of the U.N. Charter, see American Foreign Policy, 1950-1955: Basic Documents, vol. I, pp. 134-161.

connexion, as noted by the Special Committee in the resolution adopted this year concerning the Territories," the Portuguese Government availed itself of the military and other assistance, direct and indirect, which it continued to receive from certain States, including some of its allies within the framework of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). In that resolution, the Special Committee also noted with alarm threatening statements emanating from Portuguese official sources directed at the African States bordering upon the Territories. The Special Committee has drawn the attention of the Security Council to these developments, which are cause for grave concern, with the request that the Security Council should consider putting into effect against Portugal the appropriate measures laid down in the Charter in order to carry out its own resolutions concerning these Territories."

13

99. Regarding South West Africa, the Government of South Africa, in addition to maintaining its refusal to co-operate in the work of the Special Committee as well as intensifying the application of apartheid policies in the Territory, enlarged its own power to declare states of emergency and to take repressive measures against the African populations. Further, in complete disregard of the resolutions of the General Assembly and the Special Committee, it took steps to carry out several of the recommendations of the (Odendaal) Commission of Enquiry into South West Africa Affairs (1962-1963)," including measures preparatory to the establishment of non-European "homelands". In its resolution on this question," the Special Committee also noted with concern that the South African Government proceeded with the establishment of military installations in the Territory, including an important military base in the Eastern Caprivi Zipfel, which gave rise to concern on the part of the Governments of African States adjacent to the Territory. The South African Government has thus continued its persistent violation of the Charter and of the Mandate, as well as its

12 For the June 10 Special Committee Res. on Portuguese territories, see U.N. doc. A/AC.109/124 and Corr.1.

13 See post, doc. II-67.

14 See American Foreign Policy: Current Documents, 1964, p. 211, footnote 33. 15 Resolution of June 17, 1965; see post, doc. VIII-28.