Office of the Historian
  1. Home
  2. Historical Documents
  3. Foreign Relations of the United States, 1950, The United Nations; The Western Hemisphere, Volume II
  4. Document 303

IO Files: US/A/2919

United States Delegation Working Paper

restricted
[ New York ,] November 29, 1950.

Human Rights: Report of the Third Committee 1

1. Three Draft Resolutions

The Rapporteur’s report is expected to contain the following three draft resolutions adopted by the Third Committee under the item “Draft First International Covenant on Human Rights”:2

A.
Colonial Article in Covenant on Human Rights (A/C.3/541). [Resolution II]
B.
Future Work of the Commission on Human Rights (A/C.3/544). [Resolution I]
C.
Human Rights Day (A/C.3/543). [Resolution III]
[Page 521]

2. United States Position

A.
The United States should vote against the resolution requesting the Commission on Human Rights to include an article in the Covenant on Human Rights requiring the application of the provisions of the Covenant to all territories administered by a signatory metropolitan state.
B.
The United States should vote in favor of the resolution concerning the future work of the Commission on Human Rights. This resolution calls upon the Economic and Social Council to request the Commission on Human Rights to proceed with the reconsideration of the draft Covenant on Human Rights at its next session scheduled for April 1951 and to submit its recommendations concerning the draft Covenant for the consideration of the General Assembly at its Sixth Session.
C.
The United States should vote in favor of the resolution inviting all States and interested organizations to observe December 10 of each year as Human Rights Day.

The United States should vote against plenary discussion of the Third Committee Report. If the General Assembly, nevertheless, decides to discuss the Report of the Third Committee, the United States should make a brief statement only with respect to the resolution on the future work of the Commission on Human Rights. This statement should be along the lines of the statement made by Mrs. Roosevelt in the Third Committee at the time she voted for the adoption of this resolution. At that time Mrs. Roosevelt pointed out that she voted for this resolution since the United States feels that it is important for the work relating to the Covenant on Human Rights to proceed as rapidly as possible. She also pointed out her concern about the practicality of including economic and social rights in the first Covenant, as called for by the resolution adopted in the Third Committee, and reserved the position of the United States on the inclusion of these rights in the first Covenant.3

3. History in Committee

A.
The resolution concerning the application of the provisions of the Covenant on Human Rights to all territories, introduced by the Philippines and Syria, was adopted by the Third Committee by a vote of 30–11–8. The United States and other administering authorities voted negatively, with the exception of Denmark and France, which abstained.
B.
The resolution concerning the future work of the Commission on Human Rights, based on a Brazil–Turkey–United States text, was adopted by the Third Committee by a vote of 29–5–13, with the United States voting affirmatively. For a detailed report of the consideration of this resolution in the Third Committee, see US/A/C.3/317.4 The United States was defeated in its efforts to keep economic and social rights out of the Covenant5 and to include a clause in the resolution requesting the Commission to study the colonial article.6 The latter clause was in effect replaced by the resolution referred to under “A” above and by a clause in this resolution, introduced by Afghanistan and Saudi Arabia. Commission to study ways and means which would ensure the right of peoples and nations to self-determination.7 The United States was successful, however, in its endeavor to have the Commission requested to study a federal state article.8
C.
The resolution concerning Human Rights Day, introduced by the United States, was adopted by the Third Committee by a vote of 44–0–4 with the United States voting in the affirmative.
[Page 523]

4. Possible Developments in the Plenary

In view of the lengthy discussion of these three resolutions in the Third Committee and their adoption in each case by a large vote, it is not likely that any changes will be made in the resolutions in the plenary session. A majority vote is adequate for the adoption of each of these resolutions.9

  1. The Third Committee devoted 31 meetings to the consideration of the draft covenant and related subjects, from October 18 to November 17. For the record of the proceedings, see United Nations, Official Records of the General Assembly, Fifth Session, Third Committee, pp. 105–176, 285–288 (hereafter cited as GA (V), Third Committee). For the Report of the Third Committee to the General Assembly on these matters, see GA (V), Annexes, vol. ii, agenda item 63, pp. 21 ff.; this describes in considerable detail the parliamentary evolution of these issues in committee.↩
  2. The texts of the three draft resolutions are printed at the end of the Committee Report cited above. In the plenary debate in the General Assembly that followed, these came to be designated as Resolution I, Resolution II, and Resolution III in the order indicated in brackets.↩
  3. For the summary record of Mrs. Roosevelt’s statement, see GA (V), Third Committee, p. 287.↩
  4. Not printed. This lengthy and informative report of staff adviser James Simsarian is located in the IO Files.↩
  5. The Third Committee accepted an amendment to the joint draft resolution, offered by Yugoslavia, which inter alia expressly stated that the General Assembly “Decides to include economic, social and cultural rights in the draft covenant on human rights.…” (GA (V), Annexes, vol. ii, agenda item 63, p. 15)↩
  6. The language here requires a close reading. The final resolutions actually contained two colonial articles, (see the footnote that follows). The United States defeat was sustained on the proposal that the “territories articles” simply be studied by the Commission on Human Rights, which was “to prepare recommendations for consideration by the General Assembly at its sixth session.” (ibid., p. 11)↩
  7. In the; final instruments, an entirely new and separate resolution (Resolution II) was introduced which dealt exclusively with the “Territorial Application of the international Covenant on Human Rights” (resolution title) and which requested that the Commission on Human Rights include in its draft covenant the following article: “The provisions of the present Covenant shall extend to or be applicable equally to a signatory metropolitan State and to all the territories, he they Non-Self-Governing, Trust, or Colonial Territories, which are being administered or governed by such metropolitan State.” (ibid., p. 34) Further, the Third Committee replaced paragraph 2(d) of the joint draft resolution with a new text, offered by Afghanistan and Saudi Arabia, which called upon the Economic and Social Council “to request the Commission on Human Rights to study ways and means which would ensure the right of peoples and nations to self-determination, and to prepare recommendations for consideration by the General Assembly at its sixth session.” (ibid) This became section D of Resolution I.↩
  8. In his analysis-report for the United States Delegation, Mr. Simsarian wrote: “Several of the countries that voted in favor of paragraph 2(c) as amended made it clear that they were not committing themselves to support the inclusion of a federal state article in the Covenant on Human Rights. They were recognizing, they explained, the argument submitted by the United States, Canada and Australia that the constitutional problem involved should be studied further by the Commission on Human Rights in order to take into account the suggestions made during the discussion of this subject in the Committee. They expressed a willingness to wait another year to reexamine this matter again.” (IO Files, Doc. US/A/C.3/317)↩

  9. On December 4 the General Assembly adopted the three resolutions on general human rights recommended by the Third Committee; for the proceedings, see United Nations, Official Records of the General Assembly, Fifth Session, Plenary Meetings, vol. i, pp. 553 ff. The discussion centered almost exclusively on Resolution I (the draft covenant); no statement was made by the United States. For official texts of the three resolutions, see United Nations, Official Records of the General Assembly, Fifth Session, Resolutions, pp. 42 and 43; these were Resolution 421 (V), Resolution 422 (V), and Resolution 423 (V).

    Documentation on U.S. policy regarding a related question, the observance in Bulgaria, Hungary, and Romania of human rights and fundamental freedoms, is scheduled for publication in volume iv. The General Assembly adopted a resolution on this matter on November 3, Resolution 385 (V); for text, see United Nations, Official Records of the General Assembly, Fifth Session, Resolutions, p. 16.

    ↩