Office of the Historian

501. BC/5–346: Telegram

The Acting Secretary of State to the United States Representative at the United Nations (Stettinius)

secret
urgent
Washington, May 3, 1946—2 p.m.

44. For Johnson from Hiss. We are transmitting today by pouch minutes of Twenty-fourth Meeting of Committee of Five Deputies on May 26, 1945.37 We call to your attention section on pages 1 and 2 entitled “Answers to Questions on Voting Procedure.” Note that Committee approved of answers contained in Annex D and “recommended that the revised draft would also be considered by the five delegations.”

Question 22 contained in Annex B reads as follows:

“In case a decision has to be made under Chapter VIII, Section A, or under the second sentence of Chapter VIII, Section C, paragraph 1, [Page 274] will a permanent member of the Council be entitled to participate in a vote on the question whether the permanent member is itself a party to the dispute or not?”

The answer to question 22 as contained in Annex D reads as follows:

“This question seems to be based on a most unlikely hypothesis. But if a permanent member of the Council were involved in a dispute and argued in the Council that he was not involved in a dispute, the Council would presumably make its decision on this point by a vote of seven including the votes of the permanent members other than the permanent member who was alleged to be involved in the dispute.”

Hartley38 who drew up minutes of this meeting informs us that answers to these questions were never referred to Five Delegations or to Conference. At Twenty-ninth Meeting of Committee of Five Deputies on May 29, 1945, Deputies came to the conclusion that Security Council itself after its organization rather than Conference should answer the question. This decision which was proposed by Sobolev was brought to your attention in Amdel 24 of April 15, 1946.

This telegram for your information in your discussions in Committee of Experts and does not represent change of Department’s position set forth in Amdel 19, dated April 13, 1946.39 [Hiss.]

Acheson
  1. Not printed.↩
  2. Robert W. Hartley, technical expert on the U.S. Delegation.↩

  3. No further progress was made in the Committee of Experts at this time on the question of voting, the Committee reporting to the Security Council on May 13 that “It was the view of certain members of the Committee that this chapter [that is, the chapter entitled “Voting”] should contain detailed provisions covering both the mechanics of the vote and the majorities by which the various decisions of the Council should be taken. There was a full and free exchange of views on this subject in the Committee. It was agreed to postpone the further study of this question and to recommend the retention for the time being of rule 27 of the provisional rules of procedure (document S/35), which now becomes rule 37.” Rule 37 read: “Voting in the Security Council shall be in accordance with the relevant Articles of the Charter and of the Statute of the International Court of Justice.” (SC, 1st yr., 1st series, Suppl. No. 2, pp. 23 and 27)

    For a summary of this phase of the voting problem, see document SD/A/C.1/7, p. 282.

    ↩