CORRESPONDENCE
CORRESPONDANCE 1.THE SECRETARY-GENERAL OF THE UNITED NATIONS TO THE PRESIDENT OF THE
INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE
(telegram)
l
1 Ihave the honour toinform you that the Security Council adopted this after-
noon resolution 284 (1970) in which it decided to request the TnternationaE
Court of Justice, in accordance with Article 96 {l) of the Charter, to anve
advisory opinion on the following question:
"What are the legal consequences for States of the çontinued presenoe of
South Africa in Namibia, notwithstanding Security Council resolution 276
(1970}?"
Formal letter follows transmitting- certified copies of resolution 284 (1970).
2. THE SECRETARY-GENERAL OF THE UNITED NATIONS TO THE PRESIDENT OF THE
1KTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE
29 July 1970.
[See 1,pp. 3-4nrid6.1
3. THE UNDER 'SECRETARY-GENERALFOR PouncAL AND SECUR~TY COUNCIL
AFFAIRSOF THE UNITED NATIONS TO THE REGISTRAR
{telegram)
5 Auguçt 1970.
... Repeating hereunder texts English and French SecurityCouncil resolution
(19701,certified copies ofwhich mailed to President International Court of
Justice FromSecretary-General 30 July. Texts follow:
"TheSccurity Cocrncil
Reaffirmirzgthe special responsibility of the United Nations with regard
to the territory and the people of Namibia,
RecullitSecurity CounciIresolution 276(1970)onthe question ofNamibia,
Taking nore of the report and recommendations submittcd by the Ad Hoc
Sub-Cornmittee established in pursuance of Security Council resolution276
119701,
Takingfi~rther piofeofthe recommendation of the Ad Hoc Sub-Cornmitte
on the possibilitof riequestingan advisory opinion from the International
Court of Justice,
Coiisideringthat an advisory opinion fromtheinternational Court of Justice
Received on 10August 1970. would be useful for the Security Council in its further consideration of the
question of Namibia and in furtherance of the objectivesthe Council isseeking
1.Decides to submit in accordance with Article 96 (1) of the Charter, the
following question to the International Court of Justicc wirh the request for
an advisory opinion which shallbe transmftted to the Security Council at an
. early date:
"What are the legal consequences for States of tlie continued presence
af South Africa in Namibia, notwithstanding Security Council resolution
276 (1470)?"
2.Reql~eststhe Secretary-General to transmit the present resolution to the
International Court of Justice, in accordance wirh Article65 of the Statute
of the Court, accornpanied by al1 documents likely to throw light upon the
question."
"Le ConseiIde sécurité,
Réafirman!la responsabilitéspécialede l'organisation desNations Uniesen
ce qui concerne Ie territoire et le peuple de la Namibie,
Rappelunf la résolution 276 (1970) du Conseil sur la question de Namibie,
Prerianb tiotedu rapport et des recommandations prksentts par le Sous-
Comitéad hoc crééen application de la résolutian 276 (1970) du Conseil de
sécurité,
Prenat~!noieégalement de la recommandation du Comitéud hoc touchant
la possibilitéde demander un avis consultatif 1 la Cour internationale de
Justice,
Considérantqu'un avisconsultatif de la Cour intcrnatianale de Justice serait
utile au Conseil de sécuripour continuer examiner Ia question de Namibie
et pour la réalisationdes objectifs recherchéspar le Conseil,
1.Dtcide de soumettre, conform&ment au paragraphe 1 de l'article 96 de la
Charte, la question suivante h la Cour internütionale de Justice en demandant
qu'un avisconsultatif soit transmis au Conseil desécuriti: une date rappr:chke
"Quelles sont les conséquences juridiquepour lesEtats de la présence
continue de l'Afrique du Sud en Namibie, nonobstant la résolution 276
(1970) du Conseil de sécuriie?"
2.Prie le Secrétairegénbal de transmettre la présenterésolutioà la Cour
internationale de Justice, conformémentà l'article 65 du Siatut de la Cour, en
y joignant tout document pouvant servir Cluciderla question."
KUTAKOV.
4.LE GREFFIER AU MINISTREDES AFFAIRES ETRANGE DRFFGHANISTAN
(télégramme )
Me réferant résolution Conseil de sécurité284 du 29 juillet 1970 ai honneur
vousfaire connaitre que vous ai adresséaujourd'hui communication spkiale
et directe prévuepar articl66 paragraphe 2 du Statut. Président a fixéau
23 septembre 1970date limite pour présentationexposés écrits.
Le même télégramm eétéadresséà tous lesautres EtaMembres des Nations
Unies. CORRESPONDENCE 631
5. LE GREFFIER AU MINISTRE DES AFFAIRESLTRANGÈRES D'AFGHANISTAN
5août 1470.
II est connu de Votre Excellenceque, par résolution du 29 juillet 1970, le
Conseil de sécuritéde l'organisation des Nations Uniea demandéAla Cour
un avis consultatif sur la question suivante:
«Quelles sont les conséquencesjuridiques pour les Etats de la présence
continue de I'Afriquodu Sud en Namibie, nonobstant la résolution 276
(1970) du Conseil de sécurité?))
Cette résolutionest parvenue au Greffe le5 août 1970. Le Greffese propose
d'établirune édition impriméede la requete pour avis consultatif, éditionqui
sera sans délaicornmuiiiquée a Votre Excellence aux termes dc l'articlSB,
paragraphe 1,du Statut.
Le paragraphe 2 du meme article du Statut prévoitqu'à tout Etat admis
ester devant la Cour et Atoute organisation internationale juçtslapCour
ou par son Présidentsi ellne siégepas, susceptibles de fournir des renseigne
ments sur la question, le Greffier fait connaitre, par communication spéciale
et directe, que lCour est disposée recevoir descxposts tcrits dans un délai
Afixer par le Président,ouaentendre des exposésoraux au cours d'audiences
zcnuesà cet effet.
Appliquant cette disposition, j'ai l'honneur de faire connaître a Votre
Excellcnce,par Ia présentecommunication sptçiaie et directe, qu'en l'espéceet
à ce jour les Etats Membres de l'organisation des Nations Unies ont &té
considérés parle Présidentcomme susceptibles de fournir des renseignements
sur la question; et, d'autre part, que la date a laquelle expire le délaipour Ia
présentation d'exposésécritsa été,par ordonnance du Pksident du 5 août
1970 *,fixéeau 23 septembre 1970.La suite de la proctdure est réservée.
Au cas oh Votre Gouvernement désirerait seprkvaloir de la facultk, qui lui
est ainsi ouvertedeiprksenterun exposé écritdans Ic délaifixé,j'attacherais
du prix a en êtreinforméaussitbt que possible. J'ajoute que l'expose devrait
êtrerkdige soit en français, soit en anglais, langues officielles de la Cour
(article 39, parsgraphe 1, du Statut).
6. THE RECISTRAR TO THE SECRETARY-GENERAL OF THE UNITED NATIONS
(relegrum)
5 August 1470.
Am informing States Members United Nations that pursuant Article 66
paragraph 2 of Statute President considers them likely tbe able to furnish
information and by Order 5 August has fixed 23 September 1970 as time-
limit for subrnission written statements.
' La même communication a étéadressée tous lesautresEtatsMembresdes
Nations Unies.
C.I.J. RecaeiI 1970,359. 7. LE GREFFIERAU MINISTRE DES AFFAIRES ETRANGÈRES D'AFG~ANISTAN '
14 août 1970.
Comme suite ima communication du 5 aout 1970,j'ai l'honneur, en exécu-
tion dc l'article 66, paragraphe 1, du Statut de la Cour, de ftenirci-joint
à Votre ExceHenceun exemplaire, imprime par les soins du Greffe, de la
requêtepour avis consultatif transmiseà laCour en vertu d'une résalution
du Conseil de sécuritkde L'Organisationdes Nations Urriesdu 29 juillet 1970.
8. THE MINISTRY OF EXTERNAL AFFAIRS OP MALAWI TO THE:REGISTRAR
14August 1970.
1havethe homur to refer to your letteNo. 50143of 5.4ugust 1970,in which
you invite the Government of Malawi to submit to theRegistry OFthe Court
a written statement in pursuance of the provision of Article 66, paragrü1,
of the Statute of the International Courof Justice coiicerning the siabjectof
the legal consequences for States of the çontinued presence of South Africa
in Namibia.
I am directed to inform you that the Goverilment of Malawi does not wish
to present any written statement on this subjeci.
(Signeci) G, T. KatokiMWALIL~NO,
for SecretaryforExternal Affairs.
9. THE KEGISTRARTO THE SECRETARY-GENERAL OF THE UNtTED NATIONS
17August 1970.
By your letter dated 29 July 1970, you weregoad enough to communicaie
to the Court one copy each of thc EngIish and French ttxts of resolution 284
(1970) whereby the Security Council of the United Nations, at its 1550th
meeting held on 29 July 1970, requestcd the Courtto givean advisory opinion.
You added rhar, in accordance with Article 65 of the Statute of the Inter-
national Court of Justice, you would transmit to the Court, as requested in
paraçraph2 OF the resolution, al1documents likelyto throw Iighi upon the
question.
In acknowledging receiptof your kind communication, which reached the
Registry on 1OAugust 1970,l havethe honour to inform you thar on 14August
1970 1notified al1States entitled to appear beforthe Court of the request
for an advisory opinion, as provided under Article 66, paragraph 1, of the
Statute of the Court. I am attaching beIow, foryour information, a copy in
both languages of the printed text of your lette29oJuly 1970and resoluiion
lLa mGme communicationa été adresseeA touslesautres.Etah Membres des
Nations Unieset unecommiinicationanalogue aétéadresséeiiuxEtats nomembres
desNations Unies admis B ester devanlaCour. CORRESPONDENCE 633
l 284 (1970) of the Sccurity Çouncil, as they were iransrnitted to the afore-
mentioned Srates '.
As you already know, on 5 August, the President of the Court had decided
to fix23 September 1970as the tirne-limit for the submission of written state-
ments by Governments in accordance with Article 66, paragraph 2, of the
Statute of the Court. 1am enclosing herewith, for Four information, a copy
of the Order made by the President to that effect. On the same dayon instsuc-
tions from the President, 1 sent to the States Mernbers of the United Nations
thespecial and direct comnzunication provided for in Article66, paragraph 2,
of the Statute. In addition, 1 immediately sent a telegram informing the
Governments of the Srates Memkrs of the United Nations and yourself of the
President's decisions.
10. THE SECRETARY FOR FORElGN AFFAlRS OF SOUTH AFRICA TO THE REGISTRAR
19 August 1970.
I have the honour to refer to your letter No. 50143 dated 5 August 1970,
indicating that 23September 1970 kas,byan Order of tlie President of 5August
1970, been fixed asthe iime-limii for the submission of written statements
in connection wIth the advisory opinion requested by the Security Council in
irs resolutio284 (1470).
On behalf of the Government of the Republic of South Africü 1 hereby apply
for an extension of this time-limit in terms of Rule of Court 37.4 read with
Rule of Court 82.1. The grounds upon which this application is based are set
out inthe succeeding paragraphs.
The Republic of South Africa is the State most intimately concerned in rhis
matter and should in the interests of justice be given a fair opportunityto
present its viewsfully.
ltis respecrfullysuggested thata Fullpresentation by the Republic ofSouth
Africa might also serve to lighten the Court's task in this matter. By reason
of my Government's particular acquaintanceship with and interest in the
wholc maiter ofSouth West Africa, it might well tx in a position to adducc
highly relevant material whichmight not be available, orsoreàdily available,
to others,or might not in fact be adduced by others.
Ii is apparent that the question put to the Court raises a number of difficult
and important matters which would require detailed investigation with a view
to presentinç a full statementto the Court. 1list a number of such matters
below, without suggesting that they are the anIy onesor that al1these matters
ivould necessarilybe pursued in any statement which rny Government might
submit:
(a) The circumstances in which the Court should accede to a request For an
advisory opinion ;
(hl The validity of Security Council resolutions (such as the saidresolution
284 (1970) as wellas resolution 276(1970) mentioned therein) which were
passed dcspitethe abstention of certain of the permanent members;
(c) The force of Security Council resolutions which do not faIl under Çhapter
VI1 of the Charter;
(d) The validity of General Assernbly resolution2145 (XXI) ivhichforms the
l Sm 1,pp. 3-6.634 NAMIBIA (SOUTH WEST AFRICA)
basis of the said Security CounciI resolution 276 (1970). This aspect opens
up a vast field covering the powers of the General Asscmbly under the
Charter, the question of United Nations succession to powers previously
exercisable by the League of Nations in respect of mandates, the cxtent
of the powers OF the latter body, and the factual basis underlying the
purported exercise of these powersby the General Assernblyin resolution
2145 (XXI).
In ~iewof al1these circumstanccs my Government wouId find it impossible
to submit a wsitten statement giving proper attention to the important matters
at issue kfore 31 January1971. In stating this date, itis borne in mind that
the Securiiy Council requested an opinion at an eariy claie. It is respectfully
submitted, however, thaian acceleration of the procedure of the Court in terrns
of Rule of Court 82,2should always be accompanied by a full regard for the
requirements of justice.
On behalf of the Government of the Republic of South Africa, 1therefore
respeçtfully apply for an extension of the time-limit for the submission of a
writtcn statement to 31 January 1971.
11. LE GREFFIER AU CHEF DU GOUVERNEMENT DU LIECHTENSTEIN '
21 août 1970.
Par lettre du 14 août 1970,j'ai fait tenir à Votre Excellenceen exécution
de l'article66, paragraphe 1,du Statut dela Cour,un exemplaire de larequête
pour avis consultatiftransmise i la Cour en vertu d'une ttsolution du Conseil
de sécuritéde l'Organisation desNations Unies en date du 29juillet 1970.
Le paragraphe 2 du meme articledu Statut prévoit qu'a tout Etat admis B
ester devant laCour et toute organisation intcrnationale jugésp,ar la Cour
au par son Prksident si elle ne siégpas,susceptiblesde fournir des renseigne-
ments sur la question le Grefier fait connaître, par cornolunication spéciaet
directe, que la Cour est disposée A recevoir des expost:. ecrits dans un délai
à fixer par le PrCsident,ou a entendre des exposésoraux au cours d'audiences
tenues a cet effet.
Appliquant cette disposition, j'ai l'honneur de faire connaître à Votre
Excellence, par la présentecommunication spécialeet directe, que les Etats
non membres de l'organisation des Nations Unies mais admis Acster devant
la Cour ont été considéréspar le Président commesusceptibles de fournir des
renseignements surla question. D'autre part, par ordonnance du Présidentdu
5 aoht 1970,dont je vous communique ci-joint copie, la date d'expiration du
délaipour la présentation d'exposés kcritsa été fixéeaii23 septembre 1970;
la suite de la procédure estréscrvte.
Au cas où Votre Gouvernement désirerait se prévaloirde la facuhé,qui lui
est ainsi ouverte, de présenteun expose écritdans le delai fixéj'attacherais
du prix h en être informé aussitbt que possible. J'ajouie que l'expose devrait
etre rédigésoit en français, soit en anglais, langues cificielles de laCour
(article 39, paragraphe 1, du Statut).
La meme communication a étéadressceaux autres Etats non membres des
Nations Unies admis a esterdevantla Cour. CORRESPONDENCE 635
12. THE REGISTRAR TO THE SECRETARY-GENERAL OF THE UNITED NATIONS
(felegrum)
21 Augusi 1970.
Re request for advisory opinion am informing States not members United
Nations but entitled to appear before Court that pursuant Article 66paragraph
2 of Statuie President considers ihem likely to be able to furnish information.
13. LE GREFFIER AU MINISTRE DES AFFAIRESETRANG~R DE'FGHANISTAN '
28 saut 1970.
Me référanAtma lettredu 5août 1970relativeàla demande d'avisconsultatif
formulk par le Conseil de sécuritkde l'Organisationdes Nations Unies, j'ai
l'honneur de Fairesavoir a Votre Excellence que, par ordonnance datée dce
jour *,le Présidentde la Cour a proroge jusqu'au 19 novembre 1970la date
d'expiration du délai dans lequel des exposésécrits peuvent êtreprésentés
conformémenta l'article 66, paragraphe 2, du Statut de la Cour. La suite de la
procédure estréservée.
Le texte impriméde l'ordonnance sera transmis iVotre ExceIlenccdèsque
possible.
14. THE REGISTRAR 70 THE SECRETARY-CENERAL OF THE UNlTED NATIONS
(felegrnrn)
28 August 1970.
Re request foradvisory opinion am informing al1 States entitlcd to appear
beforc Court that Presidenhas extended to 19 November 1970time-limit for
submission written statements. Letter follows.
15. THE OEPWTY LBGAL ADVISER TO THE MINISTRY OF FOReIGN AFFAlRS OF THE
NETHERLANDS TO THE REGISTRAR
28 August 1970.
In refcrence to your letter o5 August 1970, 1 have the honour to submit
awrirten siatement by the government of the Kingdorn of the Netherlands,
pursuant to Article 66, paragraph 2, of the Statute of the Court, rtotheng
question that has been submitted tthe International Court of Justice with the
request for an advisory opinion by resolution 284 of the Securiiy CouIIofl
29 July 1970.
(SigtiedJC. W. VAN SANTEN.
La même communicationa Bcé adresste auautres Etats Membresdes Nations
Unies(saufl'Afriquedu Sud- voirci-aprksno 16etunecommuniçationanalogue
akté adresséeaux Etaiç nonmembres desNations Unies admis esrcrdevant
la Cour.
C.1.J. Recueil 197p.362.
See1, pp.350-353.636 NAMIBIA (SOUTH WEST AFRICA)
16. TH8 DEPUTY-REGISTRAR TO THE AMBASSADQR OF SOUTH AFRICA TO THE
NETHERLANDS
3 September 1970.
By a letter of 19August 1970, which Your Excellencywasgood enough to
hand to me on 24 August, the Secretary for Foreign Affairsof South Africa
requested the extension to 31 January 117ofthe tirne-limitfor the submission
of a writtcn statementIn accordance with Article 66, paragraph 2, of the
Statute of theCourt with regard to the advisory opinion requested ofCourt
by the Security Council under resolution 284979) of 29July 1970.
In acknowledging the receipt of that communication, I have the honour to
confirrn that, as Your Excellencyhas alreadybeen inforined, tlie President of
the Court ha, by an Order of 28 August 1970, extended to 19 Novernber 1970
the time-limirwithin whichwriiten statemenis may bc sulirnittedin accordance
with Article 66, paragraph 2of the Statutof the Court.
1 am enclosing herewith acopy OFthe Order of 28 Aujzust1970.
17. THE DEPUTY-REGISLRAR TO THE SECRLTARY-GENERAL OP THE UNITED NATIONS
3 September 1970.
1 have the honour to refer ta my letter of 17 Augusi 1970concerning the
advisory opinion requested of the Courtby the Security (Zouncilunder resolu-
tion 284 (1970) of 29 July 1970, andto confirrn the information given in the
two telegrams which 1 sentyou on 21 and 28 August respectively.
In thefirstpIace,on 21August, 1notified rhoseStates which are not mcrnkrs
af the United Nations but which are entitled to appear before the Court that,
in accordance with the terms of Article 66, paragraph 2, of the Statute, the
President of the Court considered them as likely to beable to furninforma-
tion on the qiiestion subrnitted ro the Court for an advisory opinion. These
States are Liechtenstein, San Marino, Switzerland, the Fedcral Republic of
Germany and the Republic of Viet-Nam.
Furthermore, by an Order of 28 August 1970, the President hasextended
to 19 Novernber 1970 the time-limit within which writtcn statementsmay be
submitted in accordarice with Article 46,paragraph 2, of the Statutc of the
Court. 1attach to the present letter, for your informataocopy of the Ordcr
made by the President, one of the recitofwhich refersto a lter of19August
1970 by whichthe Secretary for Foreign Affai'arf South Africa requcsted the
extension to 31January 1971of the time-limit.in question.
18.PROFESSOR REISMAN TO THE REGISTRAR
Yale UniversityLaw School, Ncw Haven, 10September 1970.
Because 1 am deeply concerned about the trend of events in Namibia and
becnuse I feel that critical legal issues are rbysthe question posedto the
Court by the Security Council, 1 should lfke to explore the possibilityof
submitting sorne form of amicrrscurlae brief to the International Court. CORRESPONDENCE 637
1 appreciatc that this has not been done before, though there appearto be
sorne farnt precedcninthe Court's willingnessto accept a document from the
International Leaguefor the Rights of Man in1950.On the other hand, there
seems to be no explicit bar in the Statute or Rulto acceptinga document
from an interestcd group or individual, despite the Fact thsuch group or
individual could neither initiatcase nor plead ordly.
In common law countrics, the arriicurclrriae brief, has bean institution
whirh kas provided useful information to courts, permitted private parties
who were not iitigating to inform the court of their views and the probable
effectsthe outcorne rnight have on them and, overall,has served asa means for
integrating and buttressing the authority and connict-resolving capacities of
domestic tribunals.
May 1 pose the fallowing questions to the Registcy?
1. Would the Court accept and consider a document, in the form of a
mernorial, froman individual Orgroup? If it wouIddo so, what would be the
appropriateform?
2. If the Court were reluctant to accsuch a document, would it considec
a document which, in additiontoa discussion of the leçal issuesin the question
posed for advisory opinion, also discussed the legality and advisabilitof
international arnicuscuriae briefs?
(Signed)W. Michacl REISMAN,
Associate Professor.
19. L'AMBASSADEUR DE CA REPVBL~Q UEEDERA LELLEMAGNE AUX PAYS-BAS
AU GREFFIER '
22 septembre 1470.
Me réferantAvotre lettre en date du 21 août 1970, adressau ministère des
affaires etrangères de la Républiquefédkraled'Allemagne, j'ai l'honneurde
vous faire savoir que mon gouvernement n'apas l'intention de fournir des
renseignements concernant la requêtepour avis consultatif transmise h la
Cour en vertu de Iarésolution duConsei! de sécuritéde I'Organisatian des
Nations Unies en date du 29juillet 1970.
(Signé)ARNOLD.
20. THE DEPUTY-M1NISTF.R FOR FOREIGN AFFAIRS OF PQLAND TO THE REGlSTRAK
22 Octokr 1970.
1 have the honour to transmit toyou, for communication to thePresident
alid Judges of the International Court of Justiaewritten statement of the
Governmcnt of the Polish Peopie's Republic on the question of the Legal
Co~rseyrretzcsor Sfutesof theContinuedPresence qfSouth Africa itz Namibia
(South Wesr A,fricanotwitJ~~.tandiSgecurîty CounciResolufioti275 (1970).
This statement is submitted in accordance with Article 66, paragr2,of the
Statute of the Court and the Orders made by the President or the Court on
5 August 1970and 28 Auçust 1970.
(Signed)J6zef WINIEWICZ.
Une cornmunicarionanalugiieaétérque du Gouvernement deSaint-Marin.
Sec 1, p354.640 NAMIDIA (SOUTH WEST AFRICA)
submit to the Court should permission be forthcoming. Arrangements for its
printing at Leiden wilIk made imrnediatelyshould the Court decidefavourably
on our request.
If the Written Statement is accepied by the Court, the League requests
further, in accordance with Article64 (4)of the Court's Statute, that ibe
granted permission io comment on the statements made by other Statcs or
organizations. Should the Court decide to l-ioadpublic sitting to hear oral
statements relatingto the question, the ixague requests permission to be
represented by counsel at such public sitting for purposes of making an oral
statement to theCourt.
(Sigrleci)JohCAREY,
24. THE DZRECTOR GENERAL (UN) OF THE MINlSTRY OP FOREIGN AFFAIRS OF
PAKlSTAN TO THE KEGISTRAR
II November 970.
Wirh reference to your letters of 5 and 28 Aug1970,t am directed tSay
that the Government of TslamicRepublic of Pakistan has the honour to submit
to the International Court of Justicethe written stater'eenclosed herewith
on the question OFtheLegul Consequencesfor Sdaresoftlie ConrinuePresence
of South Africa iri NamibiatrotwithslnndingSecurip CiiwncilResolution274
(1970) on which a request for advisory opinion has been transmitted to the
Court under theresolution 284 (1970) of the Security Council.
(Skned) Niaz A. NAIK.
25. THE LEGAL ADVISER TO THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE OP THE UNITED STATES
OF AMFRICA TO THE REFISTRAR
12 November 1940.
In accordancewith Articl66, paragraph 2, Ofthe Statute theInternational
Courr ofJustice and the:Order of the President of the Court dated 28 August
1970,T havethe honor to subrnit herewith ten copiof the wrftten siatement
ofthe Government of the United States of America relating to the requbyt
the Security Council Foran advisory opinion concerning Legul Conseguences
for Siaies oJ the ContinriedPresence ofSouthAfricu in Namibiu (South Wesf
Africa) norwithstandingSectrrityCourtciResolution276 lr'970).
(Signedl John R. STEVENSON.
See 1,pp.355-358.
'Sec 1,pp. 843-888 COKRESPONDENCE 64 i
26. TH6 SECRETAKYFOR FOREIGN AFFAIRS OF SOUTH AFKlCA TU THE REGISTRAR
13 November 1970.
1 have the horiour tosubrnit herewith the written sratement ' of the South
African Government in the pending advisory proceedings conccrning South
West Africa. 1wish to inform you that it is the intention of the South African
Government to be rcpresented ai al1 subsequen t stages of the proceedings,
and, inparticular, to exercise itsrighi under Article 66, paragraph 4, of the
Statute of the Court to comment on any siaternents made by other States or
organizations. Whilst appreciating that the form in which such comment
is to be presented is a maiter falling wiihithe discretionof the Court or the
President, the South African Government woiild nevertheless suggest that the
present question raises matters of such importance and complexity that both
writien aiid oral comments would bejustified.
In regard to the composition of the Court, Twish to refer you to Chapter EV
of the South African writtcn statement. As you will note, that Chapter
coniains the submission that the Court as awhoIe, and certain of its individual
members, have been invo1vedin the political issues which form the background
to the present proceedings in a manner and to an extent which, in thc view
of the South African Government, render it impossible forthe Court to exercise
its judicial function properly. The South African Government requests that
the position of the individual Judges who are nlentioned in the said Chapter
be considered separately with a view to determining whether they should
participate in any part of the present proceedings whatsoever, including that
concerned wirh the appointment of an ad hoc judgc {to which reference is
made below) and that relating to the question whether the Court as a whole
should not, as a mattet of judicial propriety, decline jurisdiction. ShouId the
Court sorequire, the South African Government will be prepared to present
further written or oral argument in support of this request.
You will also note that it is contended in Chapter TV that the question on
which the Court is now asked to advise, forms the subject of disagreement
and controversy between the South African Government and certain ather
States Mernbers of the United Nations, fncluding States nationals of which
are Mernbcrs of thisCourt. It iaccordingly submitted that the question upon
which the Court isnow asked to advisc should be regarded as "a legal question
actually pending betweentwo or more States" within the meaning of Article 83
of the Rules of Court, and that the South African Government is therefore
entitled to choosean ad hocjudge in terms of Article 31, paragraph 2, of the
Statute. Indced,as will also appear from the said Chapter IV, the legal question
now pending represents merely a continuation of the disagreement which was
characterized by the Court in 1962as a legal dispute between, on the one hand,
South Africa, and, on the other, the then Applicants "and the other Meinbers
of the United Nations holding identical viewswith the Applicants" (p.345).
if the übove contention concerning the applicabiliitofArticle 31, paragraph
2,of the Szatutewese to bedoubted or disputed, the South African Government
requests an opportunity to address ihe Court orally on this matter. 1Fnot, it
hereby designates The Honourable Jacques Theodore van Wyk, whose quali-
ficationsare well known ta the Court, to a< as judge ad hoc in the present
proceedings.
('Sigf~edB. G. Fotr~lE.
See 1, pp.377-824.642 NAMIBIA (SOUTH WEST AFRICA)
27. THE PERMANENT REPRWENTATIVES TC! THE UNITED NATIONS OF BURUNDI,
NIGERIA, SIERRA LEONE, UNiTED ARAD KEPUBLIC AND ZAMBIA TO THE REGISTRAR
Executive Secretariat OFthe Organization of African Unity
to the United Nations, New York, 13Novernber 1970.
We have thchonour to inform you that it ithewish 01'the Governments of
Burundi, Nigeria, Sierra Leone, the United Arab Republic and Zambia,
acting inconcertwith certain other African Staterosubmit to ihelnternational
Court of Justice a joint written statement in connexion with thc request for the
advisory opinion entitled Leul Conseyuences for States of the Confiriued
Presetzce of Soi~fh Africa in Narnibia (South West AjFical nofwithsfanding
Security CûirncilReso[ufion276(1970).
Our Governments very much regret, as do the other Africari Governments
concerned, thar it has not proved possible to complete this joint statement;
relatfngto a most important subjcct on whicha vast quantity ofdocumentation
exists, within the time-limit of 19 Novernber 1970for the filing of written
statements, fixedby the President of the Court ian Order of 28August 1970.
Our Governments are fully aware of the concern of the Court thar ir be
permitted to proceed in any contentious case or advistiry opinion with the
utmost cxpedition, but OurGovernments wish tostress rheir very strong hope
and desire that an extension may be granted to permit the African States
concerned to filetheirjointwritten statement.
Our Governments trust that you fullyappreciate the elelnent timeinvolved
in the preparation ofa joint statement bya number of African Governments,
owing to the process of consultations required in suc11a situation.
We are therefore insiructed by out-Governments to request foran extension
to be granted, and that the tirne-limit for the filing of written statcments be
extended until 31 December 1970.
28- THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL AND CDMMISSIONER FOR JUSTICE OF NIGERIA TU
THE REClSTRAR
Lagos, 13Novcmber 1979.
1have the honour to presenttu you on behalfof the Organisation of African
Unity the enclosed Memorandum ' in conneçtion with the request of the
Security Council for an adviçory opinion of the Court in accordance with
Article 65 of the Statute of the Court.
Please acknowledge the rcceipt in due course.
Together with my çolleague, Dr. Abdullah El-Erian of the U.A.R. Mission
to the United Nations in New York, I caused a letter to beforwarded to you
askingfor an extension of the period in which to submit an adequate Memorari-
l See1, pp. 889-897. CORRESPONDENCE 643
dum but, as we have not had the privilegof an acknowledgernent OF that letter
or rhat our request for an extensi~n has becn granted, 1 decided to forward
you this hurried Memorandum on the subjcct. The proof of authorisation JO
to submit this Memorandum on behaIf of the Organisation of African Unity
will besubmitted toyou in duecourse, if you çhould deemit necessary.
(Signed) T. O. ELIAS.
29. THE EXECUTlVE DIRECTOR OF THE AMERECAN COMMITTEE ON AFRlCA TO THE
REGISTRAR
13 November 1970.
In accordance with the provisions of Article 66 of thStature of theCourt
the kmerican Cornmittee on Africa, an affiliate of thc international hague
for the Rights of Man, is submitting herewith a sratement l relating ito the
subject of the Advisory Opinion which the Court has been requested to give
by Security Council resolution 284 (1970).
The Cornmittee, founded in 1953, isthe oldest organization in the western
hemisphere devored to the explanation and interpretation of African Affairs
to the gneral public and to the realization of African self-determination. The
Cornmittee founded Africa Toriuynow published under the aegis OFthe Center
on International Race Relations, University of Denver (Denver, Colorado)
under the editorship of the first Director of the Committee. It also publishes
at irregular intervals scholarly and popular studies of African problems,
particularly in dation to southern Africa,
The Executive Board of thc Committee, by resolution duly passed at a
special meeting on 8 October 1970, authorized the Executive Director to
submit astatement on its lxhalf on this subject of vital concern and interest
to the Committee.
(SigncdJ George M. HOUSER.
30. THE ADDITIONAL SECRETARY AND LEGAL ADVlSW OF THE MINISTRY OF
EXTERNAL AFFAIRS OF INDIA TO THE REGISTRAR
14 November 1970.
1 am directed by the Minister of External Affairs of the Government OF
India to acknowledge receipt of yourcommunications Nos. 50143 and 50165
dated 5 and 14 August, respcctiveIy, addressed to him and fonvasding a
certified copy of the rcqucst for an advisory opinion transmitted to the Court
pursuant to resolution 284 (1970)of 29 Jufy 1970, of the Security Councilof
the United Nations and also requesting our Government to indicate whether
it wishes to avail itsclf of thc right to present a written statement on or before
23 September 1970.On 28 August 1970, the President of the Court extended
to 19 Novernber 1910,the time-limit for the submission of written stalements
by States.1have the honour to fonvard herewith the written statemcnt ofthe
Government of Tndia inconnection with this request.
(Signed) K. Krishna RAO.
l Not reproduced.
' See1, pp. 830-842. 31. THE AMBASSADOR OF CZECHOSLOVhKlA TO THE NETHERLANDSTO THE
PRESIDENT OF THE INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE
16 November 1970.
32. THE MINISTER FOR FOREIGN AFFAlRS OF FINLAND 'IO THE REGISTRAR
16November1970.
With reference tuyour letter NO. 50143 of 5 Augusi. 1970, regarding the
advisory opinion which the United Nations Security C'ouncilhas requested
the InternationalCourt of Justito giveon the Legal C(irisequenfsurStates
of rhe Con~inrtPresenceof South AfricainNamibia, notwifhstandiirgSecurity
Çauncilresolrrfion276(19701,1 have the honour to preFcnton behalf of the
Government of Finland, the following statemen'.
(Signed) Yaino LESKINEN.
33.THE EMBASSY OF HUNCARY TU THE NETHERLANDS TO THE INTERNATIONAL
COURTOF JUSTlCE
16 November 1970.
[See 1,pp.359-36 0.
3; THE REGISTRAR M THE CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARU CIFDIRECTORS OF THE
INTERNATIONAL LEAGUE FOR THE RIGHTS OF MAN
17 November 1470.
I acknowledgetlic receipt of your cable and lctteOF 10 November 1970
and of the statement enclosed with your letter.
I am directed by the President to inforni you that your request will he laid
before the Court for decision. 1 sliould add that itriotexpccted that the
Court will be ableto consider your requestbefore the third wcek in January
1971.
35.
THE REVEREND MICHAEL SCOTT TO THEREGISTRAR
The Hague, 17 Novcmber 1970.
1 have been asked to deliver to yoa statementon behalf of the Amcrican
Cornmittee oii Africain relationthe question of South WestAfrica-Namibia
on which the Court has been asked for an advisory opinion.
lSee 1,pp.370-376. CORRESPONDENCE 645
The American Committee whose covering letter1 1 enclose were anxious
that you should receive their statement before 19 November as up to the
time 1 left New York no word had been received of any extension of time.
Ifrhat should begranteciI wouldlfketobe able to inîorn~them of the ncdate.
For my own part 1 should ülso like to enquirc whethethe Court would be
able or willinto receiv aeoral or written statcment from me.
It was at the request of the Herero chiefs Frederich Mahareru, Hosea
Kutako and others rhan I appealed to the U.N. in 1946and conveyed their
petition therin 1947.
Twas firsgrantecia hearing by the Cornmittee on Trusteeship in 1944after
mycçedentialshad ken examined by aspeciülcornmittee ofthe U.N. appointed
for the purpose and found tobe worthy of "Full faith and credit".
1 would Eiketo refer to the persistent confidence of these Africanpeople in
the judicialprocess and the obligations which are owed to them by the
international community and rnember States of the U.N. and should be
grateful if this countecm be extended to me.
1 enclose also copies ofa publication on the subject of Namibia by the
Africa Bureau in London towhich 1contributed asection.
(Sene@ Reverend G. Michael SCOTT.
36. THE LEGAL ADVISEROF THE UNITED NATIONSTO THE REGISTRAR
(telegram)
18November 1970.
We have been asked by Permanent Representatives Burundi, Nigeria, Sierra
Leone, the United Arab Republic and Zarnbia to transmit urgently to you by
cable letter addressed to "S. Aquarone, Registrar, International Court of
Justice, Peace Palace, The Hague, Netherlands" and dated "New York,
13 November 1970". Text reads as follows:
[See No. 27, supra.]
The letter airrnailtoday.
STAVROPOULOS.
37- THE REGISTRAR70 THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL AND COMMlSSlONEK FOR JUSTICE
OF NlGERIA
(lelegram)
18 November 1970.
Re your letter 13November no request,for extension of time-limit had been
received when your letter arrived but toda1 received notice of despatcof a
letter from Permanent Kepresentatives of Burundi, Nigeria, Sierra hone,
SeeNo. 29, supra. . .
Not reproduced.646 NAMIBIA (SOUTH WEST AFRICA)
United Arab Republic and Zambia requesting extension of the time-limit to
31 December to enable those Stateactingin concert wiib certain other African
States to submit joint statcment. President however is rioi dispotogrant
any extension but intendsto inform al1recipients of special and direct com-
munication that Court willbe prepared to hear oral stalements from them in
the course of hearingto beheld atdate subsequently to benotifieat present
envisaged not before end January. Organisation African Unity was not
considered byPresidenias likelyto beable to furnish information question.
Whereas underArticle 66parügraph3 of Statute aStatewhich has not received
special communication referred toin paragraph 2 may cxprcss desire to be
heard, thidsoes notapply to orgünizations. If organizatias suchperseveres
with its intention its request will hato be submitted to Court itself for
decision which not likely before third week in January.our Memorandum
can be accepted as properly submittcd within tirne-limit if it is promptly
established ihat iispresented nominally by al1five or any one or more of
dorement ionedStates.
38. LE DIRECTEUR DES AFFAIRESJURIDIQUESDU MINISI'E RES AFFAIRES
ÉTRANGÈRESDE FRANCE AU GREFFIER.
18novembre1970.
J'ai l'honneurdevous adresser ci-joint l'exposét'rdesvues du Couverne-
ment françaissur certainsaspectsde la question posée,pour avis consultatif,
à la CourinternationaledeJustice par le Conseil de sécuritédans sa résolution
no 284 (979).
(Siplé] Guy DE LACHARRIERE.
39. LE SECRÉTAIRED'ÉTAT SUPPLEAN ATX AFFAIRES É~RANGÈRES DE LA
R~PUBLIQUE SOCIALISTEFÉD~RAT~VEDE YOUGOSLAVIE A LA COUR
INTERNATIONALEDE JUSTICE
18novembre 1970.
[Voir 1,p, 898.1
40. THE PERMANENT REPRESENTATIVE OF NIGERlA TO THE UNITED NATIONS TO
THE REGISTRAR
(telegram)
70November 1970.
Have honour to confirm thatMemorandum on SecurityCouncil resolution 284
(1970) in respect of Namibia already submitted to you by Dr. Elias,Attorney-
General of the Federation and Commissioner of Jusricc of Nigerisponsored
by the Government of the Eederal Republic of Nigeria.
Edwin OGRU.
-
Voir1,p. 362-369. CORRESPONDENCE
41. THE REGISTRAR TO THE REVEREND MICHAEL SCOTT
23 Novemkr 1970.
Thank you for your letter of 17 November 1970concerning the subject of
your visit io me on the sameday. I am encIosing for your informationa copy
of my reply to the letteof13 November 1970 from the Executive Director of
the American Cornmittee which you delivered to me.
With regard to your ciwn request, 1 regrer to have to inform you that as
paragraph 7 of Article 66 OFthe Statute provides for the Court receiving
written statcments, or hearing oral statcments, from Statesor internaiional
organizations considered by the President as likely to be able to furnish
information on the question, but not from individuals, it will not be possible
for the Court to receive a writteor oral statement fromyou personally.
42. THE REGISTRAKTO THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOROF THE AMERICAN COMMITCEE
ON AFRICA
24 November 1970.
I acknowledge receipt of your letteof 13 November 1470and of the state-
ment enclosed thereinrelating to the subject of the advisory opinion requested
of the Court bythe Security Council resolution 284 (1970).
Asthe American Cornmittee on Africa isnot an international organizarion
it could not have been considered by the President of the Couas likely to be
able to furnish information on the question, andwas not sent a special and
direct communication to that efTectunder paragraph 2 of Article 66 OF the
Statute of the Court. 1 regrethave to inform you thatitis not possible for it
to submit a written statement or to bc heard on the question.
1 am accordingly returning to you under separate cover the copy of the
Statement of your Committee left with me on 17 November 1970 by the
Reverend G. Michael Scott.
43. THE REGISTRARTO THE PERMANENT REPRESENTATIVES TO THE UNITED NATIONS
OF BURUNDI, NIGERIA, SEERRA LEONE, UNITED ARA8 REPUBLIC AND ZAMRIA
24 Nevember 1970.
1have the honour toacknowledge the receipt of your letter No. 98/0AU/70
of 13November 1970,reccivedin the Registry of th^Court in the late afternoon
of 19 November 1970, in which you express the dcsire of your Governments
that an extension may be granted of the tirne-limit of 19November 1970fixed
by the Prcsidentof theCourt for the filingof written statcments on the question
concerning the LegaI Conseqriencesfor Sfates of the ConiitzuedPr~sericeof
South Africa NiNamibie (SoilthWest Africa) ~iorwithstundinSecurity Couneil
Resd~ition 276 (1970).
At your request the text of your letthad been cabled to me by the Legal
Counsel of the United Nations on 18 November 1979.
Prior to the receipt of this tçlegram and of your letter, a letter NO-ed 13648 NAMIBIA (sou-rn WEST AFRICA)
vember 1970 had been received in the Registry on 17 November 1970 From
Dr. T. O. Elias, Attorney-General of the Eederation of Nigeria and Commis-
sioner for Justice, purportingto present a written statement on behalf of the
Organisation ofAfrican Unity and informing me: "Togetlier with mycolleague,
Dr. Abdullah El-Erian of the U.A.R. Mission tu the United Nations in New
York, 1 caused aletter to be forwarded to you asking for an extension ofthe
period in which to submit an adequate Memorandum but, as we have not had
the privilege of an ackn~wledgement of that lettcr or that Our request for an
extension has been granted,Idecidedto forwardyou this Iiurried Memorandum
an the subject."
By telegram dated 18 November 1970 1 informed Dr. Elias that no request
for an extension of the time-limit had been received when his letter arrived
but that on the same day 1received notice of the de~piitcliof your letteof
13 November 1470requesting an extension of the tirne-iimit to 31 Becember
1970.1 further informed Dr. EIias that the President was not disposed to grant
any extension but intended to inform al1recipients ofihe special and direct
cornmunication that the Court would k prepared to hear oral statements
in the course of hearings to be beld at a date subsequeiltIy to be notified, ai
present not envisaged before the end of January, 1 alsi] informed Dr. Elias
that the Organisation ofAfrican Unity had not ken considered by the President
as likelyto be able ta furnish information on the question and that whereas
under Article 66, paragraph 3 of the Statute a State which hadnot rcceived
the special communication referred tu in paragraph 2 might express the
desire to be heard, this did not applyto organizations. If the organization as
such persevcred with its intention its request woiild have to be submitted to
the Court itself for decision, which was not likely befcirethe third week in
January, His rnemorandum couId be accepted as propr:rlj, submitted within
the time-limit if it were promptly established that it was presented nominally
by al1five or any one or more of the fiveStates signatories tothe letrerof
13 November 1970.
On 21November 1970I receiveda telegram from the Permanent Representa-
rive of Nigeria to the United Nations, H.E. Mr. Edwin Cbgbu, confirminç that
the rnemorandum submitted by Dr. Elias was "sponsared by the Government
of the Federal Republic of Nigeria".
1 am directed to inform you that inthe circumstances the President has
decided to çonsider the staternent submittedby Dr. Elias as thc written state-
ment of the Government of Nigeria. He is thus not ableto grant any extension
of the tirne-limit Forthe submission of written statements Onthe qucstionput
to the Court for advisory opinion, already exiended froin 23 September 1970
to 19 November 1970by his Order of 28 August 1970.
4. LE GREFFIER AU SECRÉTAIRE D'ETAT SUPPLÉANT AUX AFFAIRES ~TRANGÈRES
DE LA RÉPURLIQUE SOCIALISTE FEDÉRATIVE DE YClUGOSLAVIE
24 novembre 1970.
Par lettre du 18 novembre 1970, vous voulez bien me faire parvenir des
observations écritesdu Gouvememcnt de la République socialiste fkderative
de Yougoslavie sur la question posée,pour avis consultatif, a la Cou1 Inter-
nationale de Justice par le Conseil de sécuridans ça résolution284 (1470).
J'ai l'honneur d'accuserla réception de votre communication enregistke CORRESPONDENCE 649
au Greffe Ic 24 novembre et de porter à votre connaissance que le Prksidcnt
de la Cour a décidt de l'accepter bien qu'elle soit parvenue après la date
d'expiration du délaipour le dkpBides exposés écritsf,ixéeau 19novembre par
ordonnance du 28 aotoudternier.
45. THE PRESIDENI OF THE AMERICAN COMMIPEE ON AFRICA TO THE PRESIDENT
OF THE INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE
25 November 1970.
on' 17 Novernber 1970,the American Cornmittee on Africa submitted to the
Registrar of the International Court of Justacstaternent prepared by and on
behalf of the Comrnittee concerning the questio:
Wliat are the legal consequences for States of the continued presence
of South Africa inNamibia, notwithstanding Security Council resolution
276 (1970)?
The Registrar refused ta receive the statement on the grounds that Com-
mittee was not on the Iistof organizations to which a communiçation had been
addressed concerning the request for anadvisory opinion.
The Çommittee believes that the refusal to accept its statement was un-
warranted in law, inconsistent with prior practice, and incompatible with the
best interests of the Court and of the people of Namibia. Tt,therefore, Equests
the Court to exerciseits discretion to receive the statement.
The rejectionwas unwarranted in law since Article 66 (2)of the Statute of
the Court does not require the rejectioof any statement, but merely specifies
which onesthe Court Is bound to receive. No reasonable interpretaiion ofthe
article compels the Court to reject valuable "information" merely because the
Court was unaware of the existence of an organization prepared to present it.
The Çommittee is informrd, moreover, that there does not apprar to have
been aiiy formîl cornmunicalion addressed to the United Nations specifying
the organizations from which a statement would be received. The Cornmittee
was aware only of a general notice concerning the request for the advisory
opinion and the date for subinission of staiements (later extendby order of
the Court): this noticwas not addressed to any specifiedlist of orgaiiizations,
and the Comrnittee had no reason to believe that any other communication
had been sent out by the Court.
The refusa1to accept the Cornmittee's ststement is inconsistent with the
Court's past praçtice. In 1950 the Internat ional Leaguefor the Rights of Man
(of which the Çommittee is an affiliate)was permittto present a statement to
the Court cancerning the InfernafionStafus of South-West Africn, 1950,i.C.J
Pleadiiigspage 327.
The refusal to accept th= Cornmittee's siaternent is, finally, incompatible
with the best interests of the Court and of the people of Namibia. The American
Committee on Africa is uniquely qualifredto present to the Court information
and insights which are unlikcly to be presented inany other statement. The
Committee, the oldest osganization in the Americas dealing with African
afiirs, has ken concerned with the problems of southern Africa since its
founding in 1953 .thasparticipated in nearIy al1international conferences an
and in Africa in the lasdecade and a half, has sponsored projectsinAfrica,
has aided African lcaders and students in North America, and has regutarly650 NAMIBIA (SOUTH WEST AFRICA)
presented testimony on southern African airairsbefore various committees of
the United Nations-most recently this month. The Cornmittee kas published
numerous scholarly and popular works on African affairsas have mcrnbers of
its ExecuriveBoard, and itfounded the publication AJrii:~Today (now carried
on by the Center on International Race Relations of the University of Denver,
Colorado, USA).
Becausethe Committee is an international organizatioil, not beholden to any
government, it isable to bring insights and view-pointto the Court which no
Stateislikelyto present. It isable to set forth specificdatatonmakeconcrete
proposais without concern for domestic repercusslons, iind it has no bureau-
cratic inhibitions. The Committec believes thaitis in the interest of the Court
and of the people of Namibia that the Court receive formal representations of
as broad and inclusive a nature aspossible on a question of such far-rcaching
significanceas thar now before the Court.
The Committee, therefore, requests the Court to exercise its undoubted
discretion under Article 66 of the Statute to receivethestatement. Thestatement
is being heId in London, for resubmission, at the Court's pleasure. Additional
copies can be supplied, at the Court's request, air-freighi frNew York.
(Slgi~ed)Peter WEISS.
27 novembre 1970.
Dans ma lettre du 5 août 1970,j'appelais l'attentiode Votre Excellencesur
le fait que lc Conseil de sécuritéde l'organisation des Nations Unics avait
demandé à la Cour un avis consultatif sur la question des conséquencesjuri-
diques pour les Etats de la présencecontinue de 1'Afriqiredu Sud en Namibie
(Sud-Ouestafricain),nonobstant larésolution276(1970)duConseil de sécurité.
Le 28 aoGt 1970,je vous ai fait savoir que la date d'expiration du délaidans
lequel des exposés écritssur la question pouvaient êtreprésentésA la Cour,
fixée l'origine au23 septembre 1970,avaitété repousséeau 19novembre F970.
J'ai aujourd'hui l'honneur de faire connaître à Votre Excellence que des
exposésécritsont tté reçus des Etats suivants: Pays-Bas, Pologne, Hongrie,
Tchécoslovaquie,Pakistan, France, Finlande, Etats-Unis d'Amkrique, Nigeria,
Afrique du Sud, Inde et Yougoslavie.
En application de l'article 66, paragraphe 4, du Statut de la Cour, un volume
contenant le textedes exposésécrits sera adresséaux Etats susmentionnés.
J'ai enoutre pour instruction de l'envoyer à tous les autres Etats qui ont btk
invitts A prksenter des exposes écrits.J'espère que le volume dont il s'agit
pourra are distribué Jans le courant du mois de dtcembre.
La mëmc commiinication a été adresséaux autresEtats Membres desNations
Unies n'ayant pas prksentk d'exposts écrits (saufFidji- voir ci-aprésno 48).
Une comtnunication analogue a étéadresséele 27 novembre aux Etats ayant
présentédes exposésécritset le 30 novembre auxEtats non membres des Nations
Unies admis à. esterdevant laCoiir. Dcs copics des cornrnunicacionsdesiinécsà
leurs gouvernements ont étéadressées aux représentantspermancnts du Burundi,
desNNationsdUnies.épublique arabeunie,de laSicrra Leoneet de la Zambieauprès Lieme permet5,d.cprkiser que la,Cour tiendra ultkrieurement des audiencei
publiques aiin d'entendre ceùx des Etats invités à présenter desrexpos&squi
ilesireraient.prendre la parole devant la Cour. Je ne manquerai pas de Gous
faire connatire la date de l'ouverture des audiences dks qu'elle sera fixéemais
je puis,d'ores et déjàvous dire.que le dtbutaidu.mois de février .l97l,est en-
visagk. . ! , '_. . - L . 1. .'
- AU cas où votre gouvernment.souhait prrasinterunexposéoral pendant
ces audiences,-je vous serais:obligédelbien vouloir m'en informer. ..' . "
m-
. , . 8 8 .
1 have the honourto inforrn you that,in conneciion with thi req&t, by the
Security Council for an advisory opinion on.the Legal' Lonsequénce or States
of the ConfinuedPresencéof Sourh Africa jn Namibïa (South Wëst 'Afiica)
nozwith~fandinS gecurity CouncilRésolution276 (1970), written'statements have
beenfiIed by the foliowing States: the Netherlands, Poland, Hungary, Czecho-,
slovakia, Pakistan,France, Finland, the United Staies of America, Nigeria,
South Africa, India and Yugoslavia.
In accordance with Article 66,paragraph 4, of the Court's Statute, a volume
containing the text of these written siatements wlll$e circulated as soon as
possible; it ishoped that it wiil be available for distribution in the course of the
month of S>ecernber.
I have the further honour to state that the Court will hald public sittings in
the matter in due coupe ; the date of such sittings has.not yet ken determined,
but it isenifisag.d {bL'"they will open at the kginning of February1971;
L .'" .' . L ,I. 1%
, ..
48. THE REGISTRARTO THE PRIME MINUTER AND MINISTER FOR FOREIGN AFFAIRS
OF nJI
30 November 1970. ,
.".
1 have the honour .ta inform Your ExcelIency that by its admission to
membership of the United Nations, Fiji becomes entitled to receive from the
International Court of Justice, in addition to such communications as are
required tobemade by virtueof Fiji bccorning a party to the Court's Statute (as
to which 1am today addressing you a separate letter), such 'communications as
the Registrar may berequired to make to States Members of theUnited Nations
by virtue of such membership. , .
In this connection, 1 have the further honour. to inform you that the Court
isat present seised of a request by the Security Council for an advisoryopinion
on the LegaI CortsegueizcesforStates of theContinucdPresenceof SouthAfrica
inNamibia (Sorrih West A-frica)nofwi~ksfaridinS gecurity Coui?cilResolution276
(I970) I.enclosefor your information a çopy of this request,made by resolution
284 (1970).On 5 August 1970,on thc instructions of the President of theCourt,
1sentto al1rnernberStates of the United Nations what isknown asa special and
directcommunication, providedforin Article 66 of the Statute of the Court, toinform jthem that the President, considered,.such States .likely.ta be ,ableo
furnish information on the question before.the Court. : . - . - *T ,'-:
The tirne-limit fixed,by the President for submission 'by member States ot'
,writtenstatements on the question,exp'iredon 19 Novernber 1970. However,
1.have the*honour totinform you.that the.Court wiIl hold public sittings, at
whiçh irwill hear oral statements by such of the States to whorn the special
and direct communication was addressed lasmay wish toavail themselves of
the opportunity; and it will be open to the Government of .Fiji to make a
statement at such çittings should it so desire. Thc dateon whicli the sittings
will open kas not yet been detcrmined, but it is envisaged that this will bat
the btginning of February 1971.
The following States have filedwritten statements on,thequestion before the
Court: the Netheilands, Poland, Hungary, Czechoslovakia, Pakistan, France,
Finland, the ,United States of America, Nigeria, South Africa, India and
Yugoslavia,'Inaccordance with Article 66, paragrap 4, of the Court's Statute,
a volume containing the text of these statements wIIbecirculated to the States
rqentioned, and 1 am further directed to circulate the written statements t'othe
$hcr member States Ofthc United Qations7It is hoped !Iiatthis volumewill be
yailable for distribution'in the cqursk of the monthof:Decembcr. .
- Should Youc Excellency'sGovernment'desire to Lake part in the oral pro-
ceegingis t,would 'beappreciated if you would so jnfoxm me in due course.
. .. I.. -.
dg- -THE REGISTRAR TO THE PRESIDENT OF THE AMERlCAN COMMITTEE XN AFRICA
f
2 December 1970.
3am directed by the ~resideni to acknowledge the receipt of yourletter of
25 November 1970, and to say that there is nathing tu add to my letter of
24 November 1970 to Mr. George M. Houser, a copy of which is enclosed
herewith foryour information.
The correspondence on this subject will be brought to the attention of the
Mernbersof the Court.
50. THE SECRETARY-GENERAL OF THE UNITED NATIONS -10 THE PRESIDENT OF
. - .THE INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE '
3 December 1970.
I have the honour to inf~rm you that 1 have designatedMr. Constantin
A. .Stavropoulos, Under-Secretary-General,The Legal Çounsel, as the rep-
resentative of the Secretary-General in the proceedings of the Court concerning
the requesr by the Security Council for an Advisory Opinion on the LeKu/
Corisequcricesfor Sraies ofthe Confini~edPresence ofSouth Africa in Namibia
(South West"AfricaJ no1 withstandingSecurity Cauncil Resool~fiur2i76 (1970),
made in resoliition 284(1970) ofthe Secunty Council, adopted on 29 July 1970.
Mr. Stavropoulos is autborized to prescnt written or oral statements on
behalf of the Sccretary-General in the matter before the Court. CORRESPONDENCE 653
51. THE LEGALCOUNSELOF THE UNlTED NATIONS TQ THE REGISTRAR
4 December 1970.
I have thc honaur to transmit herewitha letter of 3 December 1970 from the
Secretary-Gencral, addressed to the President of the International Court of
Justice, authorizingme to prescnt writtenor oral statcments on behalf of the
Sccretary-General in the matter of tlic Advisory Opinion on the Legab Con-
sequeizcesfor Slales of riieCottiinued Preseiice($ South Africa in Namibia
{Sorrth West Africa) riotwi~ksfui~dingSecurifyCouncil Reso6uiion276(1970) .
Pursuant to the abovc-mentioned kuîhorization, 1also have tlie honour ru
transmit herewith, for communication to the Court, one copy of a written
statement lin the forepoing mattcr.A Furiherforty-nine copies are king sent
to you by air freight. At present the statement is available only in English but
itis our intention to supply to you a French translatioas soon as this can be
completed, probably early in January of next year.
The vast amount of material to bc covered and to bc compiled for the Court
in the ïorm of a dossier, as weIl as the exceptionalIy licavy demands of the
GcneralAssembly session on the occasion of the tweniy-fifthanniversary OFthe
Organization upon Our rather small staff, rendered it impossible for us to
complete asearly as we had oriçinally hoped, a statement which we considered
would bethc most adequate and usefulwhichwecould prepareforthe assistance
of the Court. We deemed ihat the most proper course ofaction was to cornplete
our statement in the mosi adequatc and useful rnanner, even though this
regrettably required a short delay in presenting it ro you.
52- THE REGlSTRAR TO THE SECRETARY-GENERAL OF THE UNITBD NATIONS
7 December 1970.
By your letter dated 3 Decembcr 1970,you weregood enough to inform the
Court that you had desigiiated Mr. Constantin A. Stavropoulos, Under-
Secretary-General, The Legal Counsel, as your representative in the procccd-
ings following thc requestmade of the Court by the Security CounciI for an
advisory opinion on theLcgul Coiiseq~rei~ce~r StatesoJrhe Conti~ziredPresence
of South Africa iii Numihiu (Souf k Wesf Africa) notwithstanding Securidy
Coimcil Rpsohtion 276 (1970), and that Mr. Stavropoulos is authorised to
present written or oral siatetnents in the matter on youc behaIf.
1 have thc honour ro inform you that 1 havetoday received from Mc. Stav-
ropoulos a written statement in the matter which ihe Presidentof the Court
has decided to accept though it was received after the expiry of the time-limit
fixedfor the filingof written statcments.
l Sec J,pp.75-122.
Rcceived on 19 and 25January.Sce 1,pp.207-259. 53.THE SECRETARY FOR FOREIGN AFFAIRS OF SOUTH AFRICA TO THE REGISTRAR
9 Decernber 1970.
Inconnection with the advisory opinion requested by the Security Council
in its resolution 284 (1970), 1 havehonour ro infor~nyouon behaIf of the
Government of the Republic OF South Africa that it is the intention of rny
Government to participate in the oral proceedings belore the Court both in
regard to the merits and, if required in regard to the pr~liminary questions of
the recusalof certain Judges and the appointment oai adhoc judge.
Provisionally it is expected that rny Government will be represenred by the
following persons:
Mr. J. D. Viall, Legal Adviser to the Department of ForeiAfiirs,who
is hereby appointed asAgent;
Mr. E. M. Grosskopf, S.C.
Dr. H. J.0. van Heerden Members of the South
Mr. R. F. Botha African Bar;
Professor M. Wiechers,ProfessorofLaw in the Universityof South Africa;
Mt-.F. D. Tothill Members of'the Department of
Mr.C. H. S.von Bach 1 Foreign Affairs
Oral statements will be presentin English.
ln concIusion may Texpress the hope that the Court will be prepared to
entertain representations segardingthe date of the commencement of the oral
proceedings onthe merits if,after receivingand perusingwrittenstatements
of other Governrnents, or at a later stage, my Governnient should consider it
necessary to make such representations.
54.LEGREFFIER AU MINISTRE DESAFFAIRES ÉTRANGÈRES D'AFGHANISTAU
14 décembre 1970.
J'ai l'honneur, me réfërana ma communication du 27 novembre 1970,de
transmettre sous pli séparé a Votre ExceIlence Ie testedes exposés écrits
présentéspar certains Etats et par le Secrétairegénérdes Nations Unies au
sujet de la demande d'avis consultatif soumise a laCour internationale de
Justice par le Conseil de sécuritédes Nations Unies sur les Cons.kquences
jurîdiqilepour lesEfufsde 10présencecontinue deI'dfripuede Sud en Namibie
(Sud-Ouestafricain)nonobstant la risolution 276 (1970) du Conseil de skcuritG.
Lesdits exposks tcrits ayant étéprksentes dans l'une des deux langues offi-
cielles dela Cour,c'est-à-diresoit en français soit en anglais, des traductions
dans l'autre langueontéteétablies,pour lacommoditédesmembres de la Cour,
par le Greffe de laCouren ce qui concerne les exposes des Etats et par le
Secrktariai de l'Organisation desNations Unies en ce qui concerne l'exposédu
Une communication analogue aété adresséeà tousles autresEtats admisii
esterdevant la Cour.l CORRESPONDENCE 655
Secrétairegéneral. Je ne manquerai pas de transmettre k Votre Excellence, à
mesurede leur achkvement, le texte des traductions en français des exposks
présentésen anglais, tout en soulignant que ces traductionne Lui sont corn-
muniquéesqu'Atitre d'information etn'ont aucun carat&= officiel.Celles qui
sont déjhpretessontjointes au paquet présentement adressAVotreExceIIence.
Ainsi que je l'ai indiquédans ma lettreprécitée du 27 novembre, la Cour
tiendra à une date ultérieure des audiences publiques afind'entendre tous
.exposesoraux quedesEtats désireraient faire présenter. u cas aùiserait daas
l'intention de Votre Gouvernement de participer à cette procedure orale, je
serais obligéà Votre Excellence de me le faire connaître d&squ'il Lui sera
loisible et au plus tardIe20 janvier 1971. J'attacheraiçen outre du prix à
connaître en mêmetemps le nom de la personne que Votre Gouvernement
désigneraitcomme son représentantet savoirdans laquelle des deux langues
officiellesde la Cour l'exposéserait présenté.
55. THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL AND COMMISSIONER FOR JUSTICE OF NIGERIA TO
THE REGISTRAR
14December 1970.
1have your air mail lettdared 27 November 1970,which arrived here only
two days ago.
1 have made a note of the fart that volumes of written statemenfs of the
twelveStates that have made submissions to the Court wilbe made avairable
in thecourse of this month, and that public sitrings wilI be opened at the be-
ginning of February 1971.Our present plan is to appearitthe public hearing.
56. THE EXECUTIVESECKETARY OF THE ORGANIZATION OF APRICAN UNITY TO
THE UNITED NATIONS TO THE REGtSTRAR
14December 1970.
1 have the honour to inform you that the Assembly of Heads of Stateand
Government of the Organization of African Unity on 24 August 1970decided
that representatives From certain African States should participate in the
proceedings of the Tniernational Court of Justice in connection with the request
by the Security Council for an advisaryopinion on Legal Consequencesfor
States offheCmtin~~edPresericqefSouth AfvicainNamihia((SouthWesz Africa)
notwithstanchg Securiiy CouricilResolr~tion276 (1970). In the vieiv of its
member States, the Olganization isable to fumish information on the question
in accordance with paragraph 2 ofArticle 66 of the Statute of the Court.
1therefore have the honour ta request that the Court decide that the Organi-
zation of AfricanUnity be permitted in the oral proceedingsFor the purpose
of such participationThave the honour toinform you that:556 NAMlSlA (SOUTH WEST AFRICA)
Dr. Taslim Ulawale ELIAS,Attorney-General of Nigeria and
Commissioner for Justice
Dr. Abdullah EL-ERIAN, Deputy Kepresentsttive(ifthe
United Arab Republic to the UN
havc been appointed as representatives of the Organization of African Unity
in these oral proceedings.
(Sigried)Mamaclou Moctar THIAM.
57. THE LECAL COUNSEL OF THk UNITED NATIONS 1'0THE REGISTRAR
16December 1470.
Further tomy letterof 4 DecembEr1970with which Ivansmitted to you for
communication to the Court the written staternent in the matter of the Ad-
visory Opinion on the Legal CotrsequencesfurSfafes of fke Continued Pre~eizce
of South AJrica iii Namibîa (Sou fh West AfricaJ norwirhstaitdi~zgSecurity
CouiicilResolzdfion276 (1970), Thave now the honour to transmit anoiher
document entitled "Review of the Proceedings of the General Assembly and
of the Security Councilrelatingto the Termination of the Mandate for Namibia
and subscquent action" 'which is dso being submitted to the International
Court of Justice on behalf of the Secretdry-General.
This document tracesactions of the General Assembly and the Seçurity
Council relating to Namibia from the twenty-first session of the General
Assembly to date. The document also contains an annex concerning the effect
of abstenriorisby permanent memkrs of the Seçurity Council. It is submitted
for the information and conveniencc of the Court in view of the:large quantity
of documentation coniained in thc comprehensive multi-volume dossier of
United Nations documents transmitted to the Court in accordance with
Article 65 (2)of its Statute.
I have the honour to requestthat the attached document be treated as an
adriendurn to the Statement which was submitted with my letter of 4 December
1970.
I wish io add that a further 150 copies are king üimailed to you undcr
separate cover. It isour intention to supply aFrench triinslation' as soon as
this can be cornpleted.
(Signed) C. A. STAVROPOULOS.
17 décembre1970.
J'ail'honneur d'accuserréceptionde votre lettre no50616 datée du 27novem-
bre 1970et relative 5 la demandc d'avis consultatir du Conseil de Securité de
' See 1,pp. 123-206.
Received on 5 February. See1, pp. 260-349.
Des communications analogues ont étCrcçues dcs Goiivernements des Etats
suivants:Belgique, République redtrald'Allemagne, Fidji,Chypreet Italie. CORRESPONDENCE 657
l'Organisation desNations Unies àla Cour internationale de Justice concernant
la qucstion de la Namibie (Sud-Ouest africain).
En cequiconcerne lesa~idiencçspubliques que la Cour tiendra ultérieurement
afin d'entendre ceux des Etatsinvitts h présenter desexposes qui dksireraient
prendre la parole dcvant la Cour, j'ai l'honneur de vousinformer que mon
gouvernement n'envisage pas pour lemoment de présenter un exposé oral
pendant cesaudiences.
(Sigrié)MalickZOROME.
Je vous ai annoncé dans ma lettre du 14 dtcernbre 1970 I'envoi, sous pli
séparé, de plusieursvolumes contenant les exposts icrits présentéà la Cour
au sujet dela requête par laquelle le ConseiI de sécuritéde I'Organisaiion des
Nations Unies demandait h la Cour un avis consultatif sur les Cons~qu~~ces
juridiqlrespaur IesEtars de laprésenceronfiriuede I'Afrique du Sud en Namibie
(Sud-Orresr ufricuiJ rzonotisrantla rksoliifioii 276 (1970) du Conseilde sécurité.
J'ai maintenant l'honneur d'adresserh Votre Excellence,sous pli séparé,le
texte anglaisd'un document intituléReview of the prnceediitgs of ~heGerieral
Assembly andof rhe SecurityCouncil re/ndi~?10theterminarioilof the Mondate
for Numibia and subseqrl~nfaction quia étésoumis A la Cour en tant qu'additif
itl'exposéécritprésentéau nom du Secrétaire généradle l'Organisation des
Nations Unies (volume VI desexposés quivous ont été transmis le 14déccrnbre
1970).
Je me permets de préciseren outre quele Secrétariat desNations Uniesdoit
iious fournir un texte françaide ce document, qui vous seraadressé dts qu'il
aura et& reçu au Greffe.
60. THE LEGALCOUNSEL OF THE UNITED NATIONS TO THE REGISTRAR
8 January 1971,
1wish to rcfcrto my letter of 29 JuIy 1970 transmitting a request by the
SecurityCouncil for an advisory opinion on the LegralCoizst.qirencesfoStates
of fh~ Cur~tinuedPrese~zceoJ So~rrhAfricain Numihia tzotwfthst~ndi~igSecurity
CouiicilRe,solufion276 (1970).
In accordance with Article 65 of the Statute of the InternationaE Court of
Justice, 1 have transrnittetoyou, in several instalments beginning1 October
1970,to be made available to the Court, 30 dossiers in English and 30 dossiers
in Frenchcontainingdocuments likely to throw light upon the question which
has been submitted to the Court. T certifythatal1 these documents arefinal
officia1records of the Unitcd Nations or true copies thereof except for certain
documents which existin mimeographed form only and are so indicated inthe
La mêmecomrnunicaiiona étéadrcssée a tousles autrcsEtats admis àcster
devant la Cour.
*Not rcproduced.Table of Contents of the dossier.A cornplete list of al1documentation trans-
rnitted will be foundinthe Table of Contcnts which is part of each dossier.
The IntroductoryNote has been prepared with aviewto facilitating thuse
of the dossier. The Secretary-General will be gladta provide the Court with
any additional documentation or information in his possession which ihe Court
rnightfind useful in its consideration of the opinion requested by the Security
Council.
(Skne(1) C. A. STAVROP~ULQS.
8 January 1971.
I havethe honour to refer toyour letter of 27 Novernber 1970 by which
you informed me, it~lerdia,that the date of the sittiolshe Court in regard
to the request by the Security Council foran Advisory Opinion on the Legal
ConsequencesforStates of the ContinuedPresence ofSouth Africa iirNamibia,
flowithsfanding .%curiby Councif Resolufion 276 (1970), has no t yet been
determincd, but that it isenvisaged they wiopen at the beginningofFebruary
1971.
I now write to inform you that 1 shall participate in the oral proceedings
on behalf of the Secretary-General of the United Nations.
62. THE REGISTRAR TO THE LEGALCOUNSELOF THE UNITED NATIONS
Il January 1971.
The 150 copies of the Engllsh textof the document, referred ta in your
letter of f6 December 1970 and entitlcd "Review of the Proceedings of the
General Assembly and of the Security Council relating tithe termination OF
the Mandate for Namibia and subsequent action", subrnitted to the Court on
behalf of the Secretary-General, have now ken rcceived in the Registry.
Copies of the document have been furnished to the Mernbrs of the Court,
and it is alsobeing transmitted to al1States which have received the.special
and direct communication provided for in Article 66, ~iaragraph 2, of the
Statute of the Court.
63. THE REGISTRAR TO THE EXECUTIVE SECRETARY OF THE',ORGANIZATION OF
AFRlCAN UNITY TO THE UNITED NATIONS
1 have the honour to acknowledge the receipt of the lettei of 14 Decembet
1970 by which Your Excellency requests that the Court decide to permit
See 1, pp42-72.
See1, pp. 9-41. CORRESPONDENCE 659
participationby the Organization of African Unity in the oral proceedings
relating to the requesby the Security Council for an advisory opinion on the
LegaI Consequencesfor Srutesofthe ContinuedPresence of Sourk Africa in
Namibia (South West Africa) riotwithxtanding Secririty CouncResolution 276
(1970).
Your Excellency was atthe same tirne good enough to inform me of the
names of those appointed as representatives of the Organization of African
Unity for the purpose of participation in the oral proceedings.
1 have not failed to communicate the contentsofyour letter to the Court.
64. THE CHARG EIAFFAIRES A.1. OF SOUTHAFRICA TO THE NETHERLANDS LO THE
REGISTRAR
14January 1971.
I have the honour to inform you that Mr.J. D. Viall, Legal Adviser to the
Department of Foreign Aflairs of the Governrnent of the Republic of South
Africa wilI be arriving in The Hague on 15January 1971 and bhat from that
date al1communications to the Representation of the Governmentof South
Africa relating to the advisory opinion requested by the Security Council in
its resolution 284 (1970)should be addressedto Mr. Viall al the Ambasador
Hotel, Sophialaan 2, The Hague.
63. THE REPRWENTATIVE OF THE GOVERNMENT OF SOUTH AFRICA
TO THE REGISTRAR
14 January 1971.
1refer to your letters of 27 November1970and 14Decernber 1970, and the
leirer of 9 December 1970addressedtoyouon behalf of my Government and
now have the honour tomake certain submissionson behalf of my Government
concerning the course of thefurther proceedinig nsthis matter.
In particular 1 hereby make forma1 application thatthe question OFthe
Court's jucisdiction and the propriety of its furnishingthe Opinion requested
of it (videChapters TI1andIV ofthe South African writien statement), be
deait with as preliminary points.
It is submitted that it is in accordance with basic principles of Jusrice and
of practical convenience ohat these essentially preliminary points should k
considered separately and at the outsei,and that only after they have ben
determined should arrangements bemade for anyfurtherproceedings which
may benecessary.
As Rosenne States,where in advisory proceedings the Court
lSee pp.22 and 27, supra. "is being asked to make a judicial settlement of a dispute or a question
actually pending betwecn two or more States, or between the Organizarion
and a State ...the analogy with the contentious procedurc becomes close
enough to warrant the introduction of a forma! preliminary objection
procedure. Considerations of justice would seeni to require that the
rcspondent State should not be called upon to makc any pleading, written
or oral, on the rnerits if ihc cornpetence of the Court should be disputed
by it until the prelirninary question has beenjudiciüllydccided. Conversely,
thesame considerations require that States in thc pusitioof respondents,
or quasi-respondents, in this type of procccdings, should be enabled to
argue fulIy the question of jurisdictioii in isolation from the argument on
the merits." {Rosenne, S.,TAC Law andPractice of[Ite Infer~zarioi~lolrrt,'
2nd ed., Vol. II,p.728.:
That the question on which the Court is asked 20 advise in the instant case
concerns legalquestions actually pending has been demonstratcd in Chapter IV
of the South AFrican written statement. Whether the cluestions are regarded
as pending between South Africa and othcr States, or between South Africa
and the United Nations as an organization, is immaterial for purposes of the
present application. The conflictfng attit~idesexpressed in the various written
statements before the Court further underline the basically contentious nature
of the praceedings. This aspect appears self-evidentbutcanbe further developed
if the Court entertains any doubi about it.
The considerations of justice mentioned by Dr. Rosenne in the above-
quoted passage are particularly pertinent in the present case. Amonçst the
preliminary points raiscd by the South African Governrnent is the contention
that, by reason of the political background to the proceedings and the fact
that the Court itsclf has become embroiled therein, the Court shouId decline
to give an opinion. Tt would indeed be anomalous if, beFore the Court has
considercd this preliminary issue, there should be a full-scale examination of
the merits of the dispute. In the present context it isapposite tonote that in
thcir written staternentsthe Secretary-Gcneralof the United Nations, as wellas
certain States, have açain indicated Lhat they desire, and indeed expect, the
Court to advance the political cause advocated by them rather than to exercise
its jiidicial task in an impartial manner. This 1sparticularly evident in the
contention (raised mainly by the Secretary-General and the Governnlent of
India) that the Court should without investigation assurne the ilfegality of the
South African presence in South West Africa, and the legality of al1relevant
United Nations actions. (Vide, e,p., the written statement submitted by the
Secrctav-General, at pp. 788-792 l.)In other words, the Court isasked not to
det~rmine the merits of the dispute, but to pronounce on the consequences
that would folIowif one of the particswere correct in it!;attitude. Tharsuch a
contention is advanced in al1 apparent seriousn~ssemphasizes the extent to
which the Secretary-General and others regard the Court in the present malter
as a handmaiden OF the majority in the United Nations, rather than as an
independent judicial Qrgan.
For the reasons set out above, it is submitted that in the present casejustice
requires the adoption of a procedure sirnilar to that applied in preliminary
objections incontentious proccedings. As will be shown below, considerations
of practical convenience lead to the same conclusion.
qee 1, pp. 75-78. CORRESPONDENCE 66 1
The essence of the dispute on the merits concerns rhe purported revocation
by the General Assembly of South Africa's title to administer South West
Africa. The issuesare legal insafar as they relate to the powers of the General
Assembly to take sucha step. Howeve~,even if thc Court werc to hold that
the General Assembly has such powers there are far-reaching factuül issues
selating to the ground upon which the General Assembly purported to act,
viz.,allegcd violationby South Africa, ihrough its policies and administration,
of its trust obligations under the Mandate. Practical considerations dictate
that before such a wide field of enquiry is embarked upon any preliminary
poiiltsas to jurisdiction or propriety should first bedisposed of.
Confirmation of the wide ambit of such an enquiry is providcd by the
written statements before the Court. A constant theme in many of them is
rhat South Africa lias contravened certain norms and standards said to have
been laid down by the Mandate, the Charter and international law generally.
Amongst these are norms concerning the promotion of self-determination and
the prohibition of racial discrimination. Similar allegations have been made
in the United Nations and elsewherc, and in the event of an enquiry inio the
merits, the South African Government wouId wish to avail itselOF the op-
portunity of refuting them conclusively,once and for all. To do so, the South
African Government would first need to give due attention to the general
principles governing the establishment of rules of international law, with
particular reference to the norms aIleged io have been contravened. After
having dctermined the exact content of these norms (whether they beregarded
as legal or moral) the South African Government proposes to dernonstrate
that it has in fact complied with thcm. The Court will appreciate that the issues
thus raised are extensive. By way of example may be rnentioned the United
Statcs dlegation that South Africahas contravened the Mandate by its general
pokicy in South West Africa as well as by its conduct with regard to land
distribution, political rights, freedom of movement, freedom of rcsidence and
rights to own land, freedom of employment, the righi io famiIy life and the
right to eduration (pp. 63-71)'.The conclusion in the United States statement
is tha:
"the obligation to proniote the well-beingand social progress of the people
of Nami bia Is violated when the Mandatory implements a systematic
policy,as described in part above, to effectpolitical, economic, social and
educational repression" (at p. 702).
In the statement of the Secretary-General iris contended that the people of
South West Africa havein anumberof respectsnat ken pcrmitted io exercise
their rights of self-determination (videpp. 807113).This contention iiivolves,
apart from an enquiry into the exact nature and ambit of the inhabitants'
rights of self-determination, an inveitigation into the methods employed to
give effect tosuch rights in South West Africa, and an examination of the
accuracyand adequacy ofthe numerous United Nations documents cited in the
statement (these include resolutions, statements by Petitioners, voluminous
reports of Cornmittees, etc.).
It will be apparent that the issues raised by the allegations outlined above
(and these are but examples of those contained in the written statements)
cover a vast field. k pmper investigation of them would require extensive
lSec 1, pp.864-871
Ibid., p. 870.
Ibid.pp. 88-92.662 NAMIBIA (SOUTH WEST APRICA)
research into the proceedings of United Nations Organs.conternporary State
praciice in almost dl aspects of political, economic, social and educatirinal
conditions, the question whether rules of international law (or standards of
interpretaiion) have been established by such procedings or practice, the
precise content of any such norms or standards, and a cornprehensivecornpiIa-
tion of the true facts concerning South West Africa, in their proper context
and with a formulation of the reasans for the policies applied by the Govern-
ment of South Africa. Prcsentation to the Court of the niaterial thus gathered
may well require procedures other than rhose usually empIoyed in advisory
proceedings. Consideration will accordingly have to be given to the possible
need for oral testimony, inspections ii~loco, and other methods of placing
evidcnce before the Court.
Frorn the nature of the disputes on the meritsof whichexamples are given
above, a number of consequences flow .he firsthas already been mentioned,
namely thnt it would be inexpedient to embarkupon such an extensive undcr-
taking until the Couri has satisfied itboth of itsownjurisdiction, and of the
propriety of the exercise thereof. The second consequence is that suficient
time for preparation should be perrnitted.Tthas been pointed out that intheir
nature the present procecdings, although in form advisory, reIate in essence
to an actual dispute, and shouId therefore atiract the procedure laid down
for contentious cases. This consideration would entail, infer dia, that time
limits should be fixed in accordance with the prinçiples appIied in contentious
proceedings, withdue regard Eothe extensiveambit of the issues.FinaIly, to do
justice to South Africa as a quasi-respondent, and also to permit of a work-
mantike disposition of thc case, some procedurewould have to be devised
whereby the vague and general ailcgations in the written statements are
formulateciin a manner which would enable the issues, piirticularly the factual
ones, to bc dehed with reasonable precision. The way in which this shwld be
done nced not be considered now-poaibly the Court itself could, wereitto
decide to give an opinion on the factual issues, define these issonsthe bais
of the written stritements placedbefore it.
For the reasons set out above, I wish to apply formally on behalf of the
Government of South Africa that, afterthe Court Iras decided upon its com-
position, the following pracedurc should be followed:
(a) TheCourt should, before entering intothe merits of thequestion before it,
determine wliether it has jurisdiction and,so,whether It should exercise
it. It is requested thar aoral hearing should form a part of these pre-
liminary proceedings.
(b) If the Court were to hold that it has jurisdiction anclshould,asa matter
of propriety, exercise ir,ifit were tu refuse the application set out in (a)
above, it should
Ci)in some way which it considers appropriate, cause the ambit of the
issues to be defined;
(ii)fixa date for the further proceedings which is in accordance with
practice in contentious cases and is commensurate with the ambit of
the issues, as defined.
Ifthe Court entertains any doubt about any of the rnatters dealt with in
(a)and (b) above, the South African Government requests an opportunity to
ampIify this letteby way of an oraI presentation.
ShouIdthe Court refuse the applications set out in (o,iand (b) above, the
South African Government would wish tu make representsttions about the CORRESPONDENCE 663
period tolx dlowed for preparation forthe further proceedingTn viewof the
nature and ambit of the factual allegations and legal contentiraisedin the
written statements beforethe court and their lackof definitionan extensive
period would be required.These aspectswill, hawever,be further developedif
and when theyarise.
65. THE AMBASSADDR OP FINLAND TO THE NETHERLANDS TO THE REGlSTRAR
19January 1871.
With reference to the lettNo. 50715 of the International Court of Justice,
dated 14Decembtr 1970,to the Ministerof Foreign Affairs of Finland 1 have
the honour to inform you that the Government of Finland will participate in
the oral proceedings kfore the Court concerning an advisory opinion of
the Court on the Legai ConsequencesforStates of the LontinuedPresence of
SouthAfrim inNamibia. The oral statement of Finland will be presented in
French Ianguageby Professor Erik Casirén.
(Signed) Paul GUSTAFSSON.
67. THE ACTING LECAL ADVISER M THE DEPARTMEUTOF STATE OF THE UNITED
STATES OF AMERICA TO THE REGISTRAR
19January 1971.
Thank you for your letreof 14Rcember 1970.
1 have the honot to inform you that it ithe intention ofmy Government
to present an oral statementtothe Court in the advisory proceeding relztting
ta L-egalConsequences forStafes of the ConrinuedPresence of South Africo in
Numibiu (South West Africa) notwithstand incurityCououncRilesolution276
(1970). The representative of thUnited States will be John R. Stevenson,
the Legal Adviser.Mr. Stevenson will speak in English.
68. LE MINlSTREDES AFFAIRES ~TRANGÈRES DE BULGARIE AU GREFFIER
(rél&ramme)
20janvier 1971.
Priere informer date procédure pour pouvoir décider eveientuellemen iur
participationainsique représentant.664 NAMlBlA (SOUTH WEST AFKICA)
69. LEGREFFIER AU MINISTRE DES AFFAIRES~RAMG~RES DE BULGARIE
(bëlkgramme)
20 janvier 1971
En réponsevotre télkgramme 20 janvier vous informe que date d'ouverture
procédure orale n'est pas encorc fixée.Vousavertiraidh que cette datesera
connue.
70. LE SECRETA IR~EERAL DU MINISTERE DES AFFAIIlES ETRANG~R EES
PAYS-BAS AU GREFFIER
20 janvier1971.
J'ai I'honneur d'accuser rkception de Votre lettre no 50715 en date du
14 déccmbre1970 ainsi que des documents dont elle était accompagnée.
Avant sondépart en voyagc, le Ministre des AffairesEtrangères m'a prié
de Vous faire connaitre la décision du Gouvernement nécrlandais de charger
Monsieur le Professeur W. Riphagen, Jurisconsulte du Ministkre, de faire un
expose oral al'occasionde I'audience publique que la Cousepropose de tenir
afind'entendre les exposks sur les Cons.4pcncjrlridjqirpour les Efats detu
présence continicede IAfiiqiiedu Sud en Namibie (Siid-Ouesrafrlcait za-
nobstunrla r~solu~io276 (1970) du Conseil de Sécuritiides Nations Unies.
M. Riphagen se servira de Ialangue anglaise.
21 janvier 1971.
Au sujet avis consultatif demandé sur Conséqilencesjuridiques de ~I'~S~HCE
contiriueAfrique du Sud et1Namibie (Sud-Ouest Africuin)ai honneur vous
informer que Cour tiendra audience huis clos (article 46 Statut) mercredi
27janvier 10 heuresen vue entendrc Afrique du Sud sur question désignation
juge adhoc (article 31 Statut).
21 January 1971
Thisis with reference to our conversatioof this rnorningon the question
subrnittedto the International Courof Justice by the UiiitNations Security
Le m&me tétégrammea étéadresséaux Gouvernemciits des Etats suivants:
Afr~quedu Sud, Etats-Unis d'Amérique,Inde, Nigeret Pays-Baset au Secrétaire
génbraldes Nations Unies. CORRESPONDENCE 665
Council in its Resolution 284 (1970). 1 am writing to inform you that the
Government uf lndia intend to participate ioralhearings in Namibia case.
1shall begratcful if you kindly communicate dates of hcaring.
(SignedlJ. N. D~AMIJA.
73.THE REPRESENTATIVEOFTHEGOVERNMENT OFSOUTH AFRICA TO THE REGIS'SRAR
1 have the honour to acknowledge receipt of your telegram of yesterday
notifying me of the meeting of the Court which is $0 be held on 27 knuary
to cansidermy Govemment's application for the appointment of ajudge ad hoc.
The teIegram indicates that the meeting willbea closed one. As you are
aware, it has in the past been only in highly exceptioncases that the Inter-
national Court and its prcdecessor have heId an oral hearing behind closed
doors.
Indeed, in the past 50 years this hax, to rny knowledge, happened only
twicc and then in completely difierent circumstances. Thc hearing of the
present application would in my submission,bea most inappropriate occasion
for this unprecedentcd step and 1 would acçordingly urge the Court to re-
consider ~his aspect of the maiter. In its written staternent and in previous
communications to the Court the South African Government has stressed the
political background to the prescnt proceedings and the exteiit to which the
Court itself has becorne involved tlicrein.In these circumstances hearings
which are open to the public seem even more essential than in the ordinary
run of cases-in the interests nonlyof niyGuvernrnent and other participants
but also ofthe Court-and should not be denied unless there are irnperative
reasons thcrefor. Ifany such reasons cxist (of whicam1 not awarc}, 1would
appreciate it if you woufd cornmunicate themto meto cnable me tu advisemy
Governrnentand to obtain instructions.
For prdcticalrcasons it would be Iiighly apprcciated if youtreply couId
reach me not later than 6p.m. on Monday 25th instant.
(Signed)J. D. VIALL.
74.THE REGISTRAR TCITHE REPRESENTATIVEOF Tl.IEGOVERNMENT OFSOUTH AFRICA
25January 1971.
1 have the honour to acknowlcdgethe reccipt of your letter dated 22 January
1971.
T am directecito inform you that the Court has considered your letter
carefully and has confirmedits decision of 21 January 11971 ,dopted under
Article 46ofthe Statute, to the effectththehearing to be held on27January
197 1willbe a closed one. Me rkférant notre correspondance antérieure reliitive .à la requête par
laquelle le Conseil de sécuritéde I'Organisation des Nations Unies a demandé
A la Cour un avis consultatifsur la question des Conséquence sr~ridiquepour
les Etats de la présencecontinue ci@l'Afrique du Sud eirNamibie (Sud-Ouest
africain) nonobstantlarisolution276(1970) duConseil di?sécuritéj,'ail'honneur
d'adressera Votre Excellence un volume contenant letexte d'une noted'intro-
ductionjointe par le Secrktaire général deNations Unies aux documents qu'il
a transmis 'ala Cour conformement A l'article 65, paragaphe 2,du Statut de
la Cour ainsi qu'une note indiquant la composition du dossier qui rassemble
ces documents. ie volume correspondant, en anglais 3,accompagne cet envoi.
76. THEREPKESENTATIVE OF THEGDVERNMENTOF SOUTHAFRlCA TO THEREGISTRAR
26 January 1971
1refer to my letter of22nd instant and your reply of yesterday in which
you informed me thüt the Court has confirmed its decision that the hearing tu
be held on 27 January 1971will be a closed one. This letter serves to register
my Government's sstrongprotest against the Court's decision, which is not only
conirary to the Court's own practice in thepast but is inconsistent wirhbasic
principles of justice.
Inthe Permanent Court of International Justice an oral hearing was "in-
variübly held in public" (Manley O. Hudson, The Perinanent Court of Inter-
national Ju.~tice1920-1942, at p.563) .n the prcsent Court "hearings are in
principle heId in public" (S. Rosenne,TheLaw and Pr~crice ofthe Inlernu~ionaI
Court, 2nd ed., Vol. II, p. 571). Only on two prior occasions has the Court
departed from this principle.The ht was in the Templ~ of Preah Vihear case
where at the hearing of 19 March 1962, theCourt withdrewand reassembled
in private to attendinthe presençe of the parties the showing of a filmfileby
one of the parties. Buring the projection of the film an expert gave brief
indications relatingtopoints of fact(videI.C.J. Reporrs 1962,p.9). The reason
for theprivatesessionwas clearly one of practical convenience, and there is no
indication of objection by either party. Moreover, the information disclosed
during the private hearing was not subsequently treated as secret.
The second occasion on which the Court ha held a private haring, was
during the South West Africa cases. The hearing concerned an applicatiori for
recusal.The represeniatives of the parties were consultcd priorto the hearing
and agreed to itsbeing held in privateso as not to causc unnecessaryernbar-
l Une communication analoguea étéadressée aux Gouvernements des Etats
suivants:Afriquedu Sud, Etats-Unisd'Amérique,Finlande, France, HongrieI,nde,
Nigtria,hkistan, Pays-Bas, Pologne et Yougoslavie.
Voir1,p. 25-72.
Voir1, p.9-24et 42-72. CORRESPONDENCE 667
sassrnent to individuals. Even on this bais the secrecy of the proceedings
aroused adverse criticism (videS. Rosenne, "LaCour internationale de Justice
en 1964et en 1965", Rev. Gen. deDroit Int.Publi (c0) 1966,p. 837 at p. 856).
It will be imrnediatelyapparent that the present applicatiobears no resern-
blance to either of these two previous instances of private hearingsNo con-
sideration of practicat convenience militates againatpublic hearing, nor does
the nature of the subject to be dealt with. The purpose of the hearing is to
debate whether the advisory opinion is requestcd upona Iegalquestion actually
pending betweentwoor moreStates soas to entitle South Africa to the appoint-
ment ofa judge ad hoc. There isclearly nothing secret or even confidential
about such a discussion.And finally,in the presentcase,unlike the earlier two,
the secrecy of the hearing was decided upon without prior consultation with
States and isin fact strongly opposed by the State most directly concerned.
The Court's decision has the two-fold effectof preventing public aitendance
at the hearing and of exduding tlzerecord of the proceedingsfrom the Court's
published minutes. (Article 59, paragraph 2, of the Rules of Court.) In both
aspects this is singularly unfortunate. The application for the appointment of
an ad hocjudge rafses mattets fundamental to the protection of the interests of
the Siate most vitally concerned in these proceedings: apart from the com-
position of theCourt, it relates to the questionwhether the proceedings, though
advisory in form, are not in essence quasi-contentious. The debate on this
maiter and the Court's decision may therefore have a crucial haring on the
rnanner in which al1furthersteps in tlieproceedings willbe reguliated.Moreover
the applicationismadeagainst the background of violent politicalcontroversies
in which the Court itself has not ken spared. Yet the Court, without con-
sultation and without giving reasons, ordains a çlosed session.
In general, the South African Government fearsthat the conclusions likelyto
be drawn would not serve io enhance the Court's reputation. And, In particular,
it regretsto say that it 1snot reassured as to its own position in these pro-
ceedings.
77- THE REGISTRARTO THE SEÇRETARY-GENERAL OF THE UNlTED NATTONS
(relegrurn)
25 January 1971 .
By three Orders 26 January 1971 ' Court decidcd not to accede to South
African objections participation certain Members of Court in Advisary
Proceedings Legal ConsequencesContinuedPresence SouthA fricainNamibia
(Southwesr Africa). Judgcs concerned and voting were President Zdfrulla
Khan unanfmity (12 votes). Padilla Nervo unanimity (13 votes). Morozov
10 votes to4.
1.C.J. Reports 1971,pp3, 6and 9. 78. THE REGISTRAK T0 THE SECRETARY-GENERAL OP THE UNlTED NATIONS '
27 January 1971.
With furtherreference to the request for advisory opinion made ofthe Court
by the SecurityÇouncilof the United Nations as to the Ll;t:gl onseguencesfor
States of the Çontinued Presencoj'sourl?Africa inNamibiu (Souf/~West Ajiica)
~loiwirhstandingSecurify CouricilResalu~io~2i76 (19701,1 have the honour to
forward to Your Excellency hercwith a sealed çopy of each of three Orders
made by the Court on 26 January 1971.
79. THE REPRESENTATIVE OF THE GOVEKNMENT OF MUTH AFRICA
TO THE REGISTRAR
27 January 1971.
1 refer to my letter nurnber 151160dated 14January 1971,in which I applicd
on bchalf of my Government that the Court consider the lireiiminary questions
of its jurisdiction and the propriety of its furnishing the opinion requesofdit
before, if at al],entering into the merits of the questupon which it isasked
to advise. 1also pointed out thatthe merits involve far-reaching factual issues,
the detemination of which might weIl require procedures other than those
usually ernployed in advisory proccedings including the preseniaiion of oral
testimony, the possible holding of inspections itz lacand other appropriate
rnethods of placing evidence before the Court.
1 now have thc honour to inform you thai my Government has again given
careful consideration to this problem.The Court will recall that the basic
ground advanced by the General Assembly for its purported terminalion of
South Africa's title to administer South West Africa IIIits resolution 2145
(XXI) was thatSouth Africa had failed to Fu161 itsobligations io ensure the
moral and matcrial well-beingand security of the indigerious inhabitants. The
factual issues here involved conçern allegations repeated regularly over the
years by delegations to thc United Nations, and denied by South Africa, that
South Africa's policies and practices in the Territory oppress and repress the
indigenous inhabitants and deny them the right of self-determination.
These self-same allegations were, it is contended, efîectivclydisproved and
indecd abandoned by the Applicants in the South West Africa cases. Never-
thebss they are still uncritically accepted at the United Nations and were
indeed relied upon in resolution 2145 (XXI). They are again rcpeatcd in
severalof thc written statenlents kfore the Court.
Against the background of an apparently incurable bias in the United
Nations, and in order torefute these aIlegations once and for allmy Govern-
ment has now authorizcd me to state that if and whcn tlie stage isreaçhed of
The samecommunication was sent tthe Governments rifthefollowingStates:
Czechosiovakia, Finland, France, Hungary, Pakislan, Poland and Yugoslavia.
Sealericopiesofthe Orders were also delivereto therepreseiitativesotheGovern-
mentsof thefollowingStates: Tndia,the Netherlands,Nigeria,South Africaand the
United States of America.
See p.57, supra. CORRESPONDENCE 669
investigating the factual issues, it willahproposal of overriding importance
to make to the Court.
The proposal will seek to put the allegations of oppression, reprcssion and
denia1 of self-determination to the most fundamental test of al]: that of the
exprcssed willof the inhabitants of South West Africa themselves, byway ofa
plebiscite.
The object of the plebiscite will bc to determinc whether it is the wisthef
inhabitants that the Territory should continue to be adminisie~d by the South
African Government or s1iould henceforth be adrninistered by thc United
Nations. In the light of the existing international controversies, it willbe
proposed that the plebiscite bejointly superviseby the International Court of
Justice and the South Africün Government. An appropriate method by which
the Court could act in this respectitwill be suggested, would be the appoint-
ment, inaccordance with its Statute, of a Comrnittee of independent experts
which together with rcprescntatives of the South African Government could
actively supervise the plebisciteand then report backtothe Court.
The detailed arrangements for the plebiscite, including the membership and
terms of reference OF the Cornmittee, would be as agreed upon by the Court
and the South African Government. My Govcrnmcnt foresees no insuperablc
problems in this coiinection.
Althuugh the further implications of this proposal can be more fruitfully
discussed üt a later and appropriate stage ofthe proceedings, the rnatter is
ncvcrthelessraised atthis carly stage tu enable the Court take itinto account
in planning its further proceedings, regard being had to the provisions of
Article 49 of the Rules of Court.
27 janvier 1971.
Tai l'honneur de vous adresser ci-joint, en un unique exemplaire, lecompte
rendu confidentiel de l'audienceà huis clos tenue aujourd'hui parlaCour sur
la question du droitdu Gouvernement dela Républiquesud-africaine à désigner
unjugc ad hoc appeléà siégerdans la procédurerelative larequktepar laquelle
le Conseil dc sécuritéa demandéà la Cour un avis consultatif sur les Con-
séquences juridiquespour lesEiufs de luprésencecon~irzue Ci e'Afrique du Sud
en Namibie (Sud-Ouesr africuirz) tiotzobxtuntlu résolrn76 (1970) clr Croi~seil
desicurifé.
Une traduction française non ofticielle dce compte rendu est en cours de
préparation au Greffeet vous seraadressée,Atoutes fins utilesdts son achéve-
ment.
Une ctlmmunicationanalogue a été adressée aux représentantsdes Gouverne-
ments desEtats suivants:Afrique du Sud, Etats-Unid'AmériqueI,ndc, Nigériaet
Pays-Bas etau Secrétairegénéra les Nations Unies.
Voir ci-dessup. 3. 81. LEGREFFIER AU MINISTRE DESAFFAIRES~~TRANG~RED !;EFINLANDE
(féligrarnme)
28 janvier 1971.
Au sujet avis consultatif demande surCons6quence uridig~depréseizcecorrlinue
AfriqueduSudenNamibie(Sud-OuestAfricuita)ai honneur vous informer que
reprtsentant votre Gouvernement est prit êtrea disposition Cour mercredi
3 févrierZIpartir de midi.
82. THE RECilSTRAR TO THE BXECUTIYE SEÇRETARY OF THE ORGANIZATION OF
AFRICAN UNITY TO THE UNITED NATIONS
(felegmrn)
29 January 1971.
ReAdvisotyOpinion requested on Legal ConsequetrcesCoirriirucdPresericeSouth
Af~ica in Namibia {Soui'h West Afriea) have honour inform you Court has
decidcd that Organization of African Unity be permitted to participate in
oral proceedings. Your representative requested be a! disposal, of Court as
from noon Wednesday 3 Eebruary.
83. THE REGISTRARTO THE SECRETARY-GENERAL OF THE UNITED NATIONS
(lelegram)
30January1971.
Re Advisory Opinion requested on Legai ConsequenccsCon!i:onriPiirierseednce
SolrlhAfrica in Namibia (Sailth Wesf Africa) Court by Order 29 January
decided by 10 votes to5 to rejectSouth African applicrition for appointment
of judge ad hoc (Statute Articles31 and 68 and Rules Article 83). Judges
Eitmaurice, Gros and Petrkn annexed declaration reser-ving right tomake
known at later opportunity reasons for dissent since ad hoc question from some
aspects related to substantive question. 3udgeOnyeama and Dillard annexed
declaration dissenting on graund that although right not established under
Article 83 Rulcs of Court appropriate toexerçisediscretionary power.vested
in Court by Article 68 StatuteinviewSouth Africanspecial interest in question.
84. THE REGISTRAR TO THE SECRETARY-GENERALOF THE UNITED NATIONS
I Fcbruasy 1971.
With further reference to the request for advisory opinion made of the
Le mêmetéltgrammea été adrcssEaux Gouvernements des Etatssuivants:
Afrique du Sud,Etats-Unis d'Amérique, Inde,Nigeriaet Pay:i-Basetau Secrétaire
généra dlesNations Unies.
I.C.J. Reports 1971, p. 12.
A similar communication wassent to the representativesof the Governments
of theNetherlandsand Nigeria. Sealedcopies of theOrder were also deliveredto
the representativesofthe Governments of the follawing States: Finland, lndia,
South Africa and United Statesof America.Court bythe SecurityCouncil ofthe UnitedNations astotheLego1Consequences
for Statesof the ConrbzuedPresence ofSouth Afiica inNamibia (South West
Africa) itotwirhsimding SeruriiyCouncil Resolution 276 (1970)I, have the
honour to forward herewith a sealed copy of theOrder made by the Coiirt on
29 January 1971, of whicl~I comrnunicated the purport to you in my cable
seven of 30 January.
S. THE AMBASSADOR OF THE REPUELIC OF VIET-NAM TO THE UNITED KINGDOM
TO THE REGISTRAR .
1 February 1971.
Fucther toyour communication dated 14Deçember 1970(reference 50710),
wliich1have,asrequested, transrnitted to Saigonfor my Government'sdecision,
1 have the honour now to inform you that the Government of the RepubIic
of Viet-Nam wishesto present oraI statements the Court, and has appoinlied
forthis purpose, as its representative, MrLe Tai Trien, depuiy attorney-
generalat the Supreme Court of Viet-Nam.
Mr. LeTai Tsien willmake his oral staternentin French.
(Signai) Le Ngoc CHAN.
86.THE CHARGÉ D'AFFAIRES A.I. OF PAKISTAN TO THE NETHERLANDS TC3 THE
REG tSTRAR
3 February 1971.
Apr~pos telephone conversation of 1 February 1971, rnyGovernrnent has
decided to appear atthe hearing on Narnibia. Will you kindty let me knuw
thedate of hearing and its duration.
(Signed) N. D. AHMAD.
4 Februar 1971.
Re Advisory Opinion requested on LegaI Consequei~cesContiirued Presence
Solrth Africa in Narnibia (SoutWest Africa) Court will hold public sittings
to Iiear orastaternents (StatuArticIe 66 paragraph 2) beginning Monday
8 February1971 at3 p.m.
A similartelegrawas senttotheGovernmentof Bulgariaand to theExecutive
Secretaryof the Organizationof AfricanUnityto the United Nations. Thesame
day,asimilarcommunication was madeorallyby the Presidentto the representatives
ofthe following Governments:Finland,India,theNetherlands,Nigeria,Pakistan,
South Africaand United Statesof Arnerica.672 NAMIBIA (SOUTH WEST AFRICA)
88.THE REGISTRAR W THE PRESIDENT OF THE AMERICANCDMMITTEB ON AERlCA
4 February 1971.
By rny letter of 2 December 1970 acknowlcdging your communication
addressed to the President of the Couron 25 Novernber 1970,J ii~formcdyou
that the correspondencc concerning the desire of the American Cornmittee
on Africa to submit a written statemcnt on the question referred to the Court
by the SecurityÇouncil for advisory opinion would be brought to theattention
of Members of the Court.
The Court has had an opportunity of stiidyinp this correspondence and has
endorsed the refusal to accept the Cornmittee's writteii statement.
89. THE REGISTRAR TO THE CHAIRMAN OP THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE
INTERNATIONAL LEAGUE FOR THE RICHTS Or MAN
4 February 1971.
I refer to the letler of 10 Novernber 1970 in which, with reference to the
request by the Security Council for an advisory opinion of the Court, you
sought Ieave for the International League for the Rights ofMan to submit
a written statement on the question referred to the Court. Should such a
written statement be accepted by the Court, you askcti that the League be
permitted to comment on the statementsmade byothcr Skites or organizalions,
and you also requcçted permission for the League to be represented by counsel
at any public sitting that miglit be held, for thc purpose of makinailoral
statement to the Court.
In rny acknowledgement of17 November 1970,T toId you rhar 1had been
directed bythc President of thc Court to inform you that yourrequest would be
laid before the Court for dccision.
1am now in a position to informyou that the correspondence above referred
to has been placcd &fore the Court, which has c'arefullyconsidered the.
application on behdf of the bague to participate in the written and oral
procecdings, and kas decided that it shauld not beacceded 10.
99-LE GREFFIER À L'AMBASSADEUR DE FINLANDE AIX PAYS-BAS '
5février1971.
Me réfkrantà la lettre que j'aadresséele 27 janvier 1971 Monsieur le
Chargt d'afiaires, j'ai l'honneur dvous faire savoirque la Cour a decidé
de mettre à la disposition du public le compte rendu dc l'audience a huis clos
consacrke à la question du droit du Gouvcrnernent sud-africain à désigner
un juge ad hoc appelé à sikger dans I'aFüire consultative dontla Cour est
saisie.
Cecompte rendu paraîtra, lemoment venu, avec1creste de la documentation
Une communication analogue a&te adresséeaux reprksentantsdes Gouverne-
ments des Eratssuivants: Afrique dSud,Etats-Unis d'Amérique,Inde, Nigériet
Pays-Basetau Secrétairgénéra les Nations Unies. il CORRESPONDENCE 673
relative à l'affaire, dala sérieMémoires,plaidoiries et docupncnfi,qui fait
partie des publications de la Cour. Pour l'instant, croisbien faireen vous
adressant un exemplaire du compte rendu d'ou toute indication relative au
caractkre confidentiel du docurncnt a érééliminée.Nous avons saisi cette
occasion pour apporter au texte certaines modifications de détaildcmandees
par lereprescntant de 1'Afriquedu Sud.
le me permets de vrsiiadresser également un nouvelexemplaire de la tra-
duction françaisenon officielle.Toute mentiondc sa nature confidentielleéth
supprimée et des remaniements ont étéapportés au texte antérieur pour
I'aIignersur le texte anglais définitif.
91- THE REGlSTRAK M THE DIRECTOR OF THE DAG HAMWAHSKJO LLBRARY '
5 February 1971
The Tnternational Court of Justice has givenpermission to have the written
statements in the proceedings concerning the Legal Conseqraencefsof Stafes
of the Confinued Presence of South Africa iiaNumibia (Soufh West Africa)
nofwithtanri'iiSecui-ityCoui?ci/Resolufion275 (1970) made available to the
public.
As was done in the Sourh West Africa cases in 1964, two sets of those
stateme~itsin English and French werc sent today io the Dag HarnmarskjDld
Library, so that the public may have access to thern.
These documents are concerned with a case which is still sjilldiand are
quite separate from the publications in the stricter sense which are regularly
sent by the Cwrt to the Dag Hammarskjold Library in accordance with
your requests.
We have also written to Mr. Sloan and Mr. Pnwell in connection with the
above.
92. THE REPRESENTATIVEOFTHE GOVERMMENT OFSOUTHAFRICATOTHEREGISTRAR
6 February 1971.
1refer to niyletters of 14January 1971and 27 Jariuary 1971.1wish to place
on rccordrhat, at aprivate meeting with the President and yourself during the
morning of Thursday, 4 February 1971, Mr. D. P. de Villiers and 1 were
informed by the President-
(a) that the Court had refused the applications containcd in my letterof
14 January 1971 for the disposa1 of tlie prelimiriary points prior to any
oral proceedings on the merits, and for the ambit of the issues to be
delïned in someway considered appropriate by the Court;
(6) that the Court had, without giving the South African Government the
opportunity requested in the said letter for the making of representations
A similarcommunication was senti.a.to the ChiefLibrarianOF the United
Nations Officnt Geneva.
Wifh theconsentof the States havinsubmitted writtenstatementand ofthe
Secretary-Generaof the UnitedNations. about further time-limits, fixed Monday, 8 February 1971, as the date of
commencement of the oral proceedings;
(c) that the Court had not in its deliberations concerning the futvreproceed-
ings, taken açcount ofthe proposal for the holding of a plebiscite in
South West Africa foreshadowed in my lctter of 27 January, since such
proposal had not yer formally been made-the letter having merely
indicatedan intention to make such a proposal if antl when theappropriate
stagein the proceedings s reüched.
1 also wish to place on record that a further meeting in the President'ç
chambers on the afiernoon of 4 February attended by representatives of various
participating States, and at which my Government was represented by Mr.
D. P. de Villiers,Mr.E. M. Grosskopf and myself,an opportunity wasrequested
by Mr. de Villiers to make theformal application for a plebiscite at the corn-
mencernent of the oral proceedings on Monday, 8 February J871. He stated
that in vitw of the. Court's decision mentioned in paragraph (a) above, the
appropriate stage for formally making the application had now ken reached,
and that it would be in the intcrest of al1concerned ta have the application
presented at the commencement of thc oral proceedings, JO as to cnable
representatives of participating organizations and States to scspond to it at
the earliest opportunity in their oral statements to the Court. No other re-
presentative preseni at the meeting raised any objection to this request and the
President undertook to conveyit to the Court. On Friday afternoo(5 February
.J971) Messrs. de Villiersand Grosskopf and I were informcd by the President
that this request hadbeen refused. No reasons were given.
In view of the fundamental nature of the proposa1 for a plebiscite and of
the far-reaching influencftmay have on the future courst:of these proceedings,
1am instructed by mmy Government to make it now by letrer in substantially
the sarne terms as would have been orally conveyed at the commencement
of the proceedings. I am rnindful of the ofîer made by the President at the
meeting on 5th inst. to draw the attention of the participantZo my letter of
27 January at the commencement of the hearing but Thiswould not meet the
above-mentioned objection that the said Ietter does not contain an actual
proposal. 1accordingly herebyapply formally thar the Çciurt take al! necessary
steps toput the following proposal into effect:
(a) That a plebiscite of the inhabitants of South West Africa be held to
determine whether itis their wish that the Territory shouId continue to be
administered by the South AFrican Government or should henceforth be
administered by the United Nations.
(b) That the plebiscite be jointly supervised by the International Court of
Justice and theSouth African Government. It is suggesred that the Court
appropriately act in this respect through a comniittee of independent
experts appointed in accordance with its Statute.
(c) That the detailed arrangements forthe plebiscite,includingthe membership
and terms of referenceof anycornmittee appointed b!ithe Court, be agreed
upon by the Court and the South Afsican Government.
These proposals are, it is subrnitted, self-explanatory and require little
elaboration. Unfortunately, experience has shown that many people who
professconcern for the inhabitantsof South West Africa are in fact motivated
by political considerations entirely unrelatto the well-beingof the Territory
or the wishes of its inhabitants.Onecan therefore expect that the proposal
contained herein will be misrepresented in certain quarters,and that certainat the meeting on the afternoon of 4 February as one wbich it was desired to
include in the brief statement to the Court at the commencement of the oral
proceedings. In rny lettcr of 14 January 1971which wascirculated that aftcr-
noon to representatives of participating States, 1 referred to the cirideambit
and lack OF definition of the allegatians OF Fact in the written staternents.
Voluminous documentation, mainIy in United Nations proceedings, is refcrred
to in support of broad allegations of violation by South -4frica of her obliga-
tions, particularly in the staternents by the Secretary-Gerieral and the United
States,as cited inniy earlier letter. When referring to the documents, one finds
that their ambit is not only vast but thattheyare riddled with inherent contra-
dictions and inconsistencies. Charges very popular at one stage, are apparently
abandoned later-ai any rate by most States, if not by al!(e.g., militarization,
genocide, etc.). This point could be çonsiderably elaborated. Moreover,
particular charges failtoindicate the ground of complaint, e.g., whether one of
delikrate oppression; or failure in fact to prornote well-king and progress;
os violation of an alleged international obligation solely by reason of dis-
tinguishing betweeii people on an ethnic basis. Unless some particularity is
introduced into the statements to the Court, indicating both the areas of fact
and thc nature of the complaint reIied upon, a proper traversal of the detailed
factual field would be an alinost impossible task, nat otrly for South Africa
but also for the Court. 1 therefore have to draw attentioii to this matter vcry
specifically,particularly sincethe Court has, as indicated above,not acceded to
my Government's request to cause these issuesto be defined in some way.
In my Governrnent's contention, however, the plebiscite proposal made
herein could bavean important and possibly decisiveinfluçnceon this problem.
The outcome of the plebiscite rnight well rule out the need for traversing the
factuai field in much further detail ataEl.
It would, accordingly, lxof great assistance to rny Government and, 1 am
sure, thc Court, if participants in the oral proceedings wereto indicate clearly
not only exactly what thcir factual allegationsare,but also to what extent these
allcgations would or could beaffected by theoutcome of the:proposed plebiscite.
To put it more concrctely, what would theirattitude be if the piebiscite, held
under conditions approved by the Court or its cornmittee, showed that the
overwhclming wish of the inhabitants was to remain under South African
guidance in the exercise of their rights of self-determiriation? A cIear and
unambiguous answer io this question would be of great assistance tu al1
concerned in these proceedings.
It would be appreciated if this letterwere circulated as soon as possible
to al1 participants in the oral proceedings so as to enalile them to bear ifs
contents in minci when rnaking their presentations.
93. THE REVEREND MIÇHAEL SCOTT TO THE REGISTRAR
The Hague, 8 February 1971.
Further to rny letter to you delivered at theCourt on 17 Novernber, 1 have
received a-renewed request from Chief Giements Kapuuci of the Hereros to
lDone on 8February 1971 (seep. 27,siipra). CORRESPONDENCE 677
represent them and should be very grateful if, without infringing the Court's
due processes, the courtesycould be extended to me of making an oral or
written submissioro the Court.
(SigriedJ Michael SCO~.
~
P.S. I enclol:
(1)a photostat copy of the above-mentioned letter from Chicf Kapuuo;
(2)a copy of a letter to the Secretary-General dated 27 November 1970;
{3) Statementof today's date and report from London Observer da7 Feb-
ruary1971.
94. MESSRS.RIRUAKO, MBAHA, MBAEVAAND KERINA TO THE REGISTRAR
I
The South Wcst Africa Natioiial United Front (SWANUF),
Permanent Officeat the United Nations, New York, 14 February 1971.
The undersigned, heing indigenousinhabitants of the internatio~ialTerritory
of SOUTHWEST AFRICA (NAMIBIA)(,hereinafter referred to as "petitioners")
hereby submit to the international Court of Justice an application on behaIf
of thcindigenouspeopleof SoutWest Africa (Namibia) andior our Agent and
Legal Counscllor to bc hcard as "pctitioners" by the onuthe question of
South West AFrica(Namibia) now kfore the International Court of Justice.
The subjectof the Advisory Opinion as stated in United Nations Security
Council remlution number284 (1970), adopted on 29 July 1970 reads rhus:
"What are the legaconsequences forStates of the continued prcsence
of South Africa in Namibia, notwithstanding Security Council resolution
276 (970)?"
Our right as indigcnous inhabitants of South West Africa {Namibia) to
petition has bccn established in the Statutes of thc International Court of
Justicc, thc Advisory Opinion of 1956and the decisions of the United Nations
Genersl Assembly.
It is imperatitharwe as a NAMIBIANATIONt,hat is, a political and judicial
cntitand WARDS ofthe United Nationsbe heardby thc International Court
of Justice. Byitstechnical judgment of 18 July 1956the Court in cflect
conferrcd the "special legal interest" uponpeople ofSouth West Africa
(Namibia).
MAY IT ALSOPLEASETHE COURT TO ACCEPT a copy of a preliminav press
statement issuedby the South West Africa National United Front dated
9February 1971regarding the so-called "plebiscite" ofler OFthe South African
, Government.
(Sigried)Kuaima RIRU AKO.
KanepwreMBAHA.
VeiueMBAEVA.
Mburumba KERINA.95. THE CHAIRMANOF THE BOARD OP DIRECTORS OF THE INTERNATIONALLEAGUE
FOR THE RIGHTS OF MAN TO THE REGISTRAR
16February 1971.
In light of the decision of the Court set forrh in your lett4 February
1971regarding the request contained in our letter to you oNovember 1970,
we hereby request rhat the Court consider only that parourfinitial proposa1
as relates to the submission OUTWritten Statement.
If agreeable to the Court, this would entai1 acceptance of the Written
Statement by the Court, but withoue the:rïghe to comment ontheoiher state-
ments and without the right to be represented at the Court . his was the
disposition of the Court in 1950with regard ta sirnilacrequest by the Tnter-
national Leagve for the Rights of Man, and we are hopeful that it will ix
acceptable in this instance as yell.
(Sigtied)John CAREY.
[Voirci-dessusp.395.1
97.THE REGISTRARTO MESSRS.RIRUAKO, MBAHA, MBAEVA AND KER~NA
I have to acknowledge your letter of 14 Februaty 1971 submitting an
application tobe heard as petitionerby the Court on the question of South
West Africa (Namibia) refetred to it for advfsory opinion.
You refer to the Statuie of the Court, its Advisory Opinion of 1956 and
decisions of the General AssernbIy of the United Nations. None of these,
however, provide for the hearing of petitioners by the Court. The Court is
bound, in thisconnexion, by Article 66 of the Statute, paragrap2 of which
makes provision for the hearingby the Court of oral stafemeonly by those
States entitled to appear before it and those international organizations which
have been notified by a special and direct communication that rhey hateen
considered by the Court, or, should it not be sitting, by the Preasdlikely
to lx ableto furnish informationon thc question.
I should add that wsitten statements are receivable by the Court subjtot
the samelimitations,that is to say, themustemanate from States within the
above-mentioned category, or international organizations, which have been
notified that they have been considered aslikely to beable to furnish informa-
tion on the question. CORRESPONDENC E 679
98. THE REGISTRAR TO THE CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OP THE
INTERNATIONALLMGUE FOR THE RIGHTS OF MAN
18 March 1971.
1 regretto seefrom your letter of 15February 1971that the lasr paragraph
of mine of4 February 1971 may have misledyou. If this is 1ornust askyou
to aCceptmy apologies.
The decision taken by theCourt, to which 1referred,was notthat it should
refuse20 accedeto al1of the requests made in your letter of 10Novernb1970,
while leaving open the question whether it would be prepared to receive only
a written statement on behalf of the International League for the RigMan.of
The Court in Factdecided not to give leave tothe League either to submita
written statement, oto participate in the oral proceedings.
99. THE LEGAL ADVISER TO THE DEPARTMENT OF STAT6 OF THE UNITED STATES
OF AMERICA TO THE REGISTRAR
Geneva, 18 March 1971.
At the sittings held on 9 and 10 March 1971 in the nialierof the Legal
Conseyuence sur Sralesof the CondinuedPresmce ofSouth Africa in Namibia
(South West Africa) notwithstundingSecuriw CouneilResolutio~2~76 (1970),
JudgesSir Gerald Fitzmaurice, Jimknez de Aréchaga,and Morozov addressed
fivequestions to meas the Representative of the United States of America.
The thtee questions posed by Judge Sir Gerald Fitzmauriceare dealr with
in annexures A-C. The questions of Judges Jimknez de Aréchagaand Morozov
are dealt with in annexureD.
1wouId lxgrateful if you would convey my repliesZto Judges Sir Gcrald
Fitzmaurice, Jiménezde Aréchaga,and Morozov and to the other Members
ofthe Court.
(Signe& JohnR. STEVENSON.
26 mars 197t.
Sur l'instruction du Présidentde laCour, j'ai l'honneurde vous adresser
ci-joint, pour information, le texte des rbponses faites par Ic représentant des
Etats-Unis d'Amérique aux questions que sir Gerald Fitmaurice, M. Jimtnez
de Aréchaga et M. Morozov lui ont posées aux audiences publiques des
9 et 10 mars 1471, A propos de l'avis consultatif demandé par leConseil de
See p.506, supra.
See p.623,supra.
La mêmecommiinicationa kt6adresséeaux représentantdes Gouvernements
des EtatsuivantsAfrique du Sud,Inde, NigériPakistan,Pays-Ba etsRépublique
du Viet-Nam, du Secrétairegénéraldes Nations Unies et de l'organisationde
l'unitéafricaine.sécuritéen ce qui concerne les Conskyuertcesjuridiques pour les Etafs de la
prksence conritluede l'Afrique du Sud en Namibie (Sud-Ouesf africain )i-
nobsianf In r6sulilfion276(1970) du Conseilde sé.curit&.
14 mai 1971.
Dans la déclaration quej'ai faite à la finde la procéciureorale en l'affaire
consultative relative au territoire de la Namibie (Sud-Ouest africain)17emars
dernier (C.R. 71/23, p. 54 [traduction française: p. 46-47]2),j'indiquais qu'il
avait paru approprit A la Cour de remettre B plus tard sa dtcision sur les
demandes du Gouvernement sud-africain tendant a ceque a) un plébiscite
soit organisk dans ce territoiresous le contrôle conjoint de la Cour et du
Gouvernement de la République; bJ l'autorisation lui soit donnk de fournir
Ala Cour une documentation complémentaire sur lcs füits en ce qui concerne
la situation dans le territoire.
J'ai l'honneur de vous faire connaître quc,après avoir examink la question,
la Cour n'estime pas avoir besoin d'explications ou de rcnseignernents com-
plémentaireset a décidéde rejeter ces deux demandes.
102. M. PADILLA NEKVO AU GREFFIER
(~elt?gramme)
Mexico, 9juin 1971.
Medicos prohiben viaje. Imposibilitado asistir envio mi vuto favorable opinion
consulriva ' y tadasy cada una sus clausulas'operativas rogandole soineterIo
consideracibn Corte cuya decision ruegole cornunicarme telegraficamente.
Sigue carta confirmando mi voto Favorable. Mi agradecimiento Presidente y
rniembros Cortes.
México,9 junio 1971.
No obstante mis deseos y esfuerzos para cstar presente alla durante la segun-
da lectura de la Opinibn y en el morncnto en que se registra el voto de los
La même communication a étéadressÉeaux représcntaritsdcsGouvernements
des Ems suivants: Afriqiie duSud,Etats-Unis d3Am6riquc, IiideNigéria,Pakistan,
Pays-Bas etRépubliquedu Viet-Nam, du SccrCtaire généraldes Nations Unics et
de l'organisation de l'uniafricaine.
Voir ci-dessusp. 604.
C.I.J. Recueil1971,p. 21-58.
'C.I.J. Hecueii 1971,p 58 CORRESPONDENCE 681
Sefiores lueces, de acuerdo con el Artlculo 80. del Reglamento Interno de la
Corte, no me es posible asistir debido al estado de mi saIud a Iaprohibiciiin
de los médicosde que yo viaje en las condiciones en que actualmente me
encuentro.
En vista de Ioanterior, deseo declarar- como Iohice yaen la conversacibn
telcfbnicaquc tuve hoy con usted -que doy mi vofo en favor de Io Opinibn
y de Iodas y coda una de sus clu~~sulasisposiîivas.
Por rnedio de esta carta confirmo mi decisi611comunicada a usted en esta
fecha,en mi telegramaque a continliacibn transcriho:
[ Voir ci-dessup. 680.1
Çonfio en que hübra usted podido sorneter este asunto a Eaconsideracion
del Seiior Presidente y de mis distinguidos Colcgas, a fin de que la Corte tome
al respect0 la decisionque proccday quc, mcatrevo a esperar, seaen el sentido
de iomar en cuenta mi voto, no obstante miiniempestivae inevitable ausencia l.
104. THE REGISTRAR TO THE LEGAL COUNSEL OF THE UNITED NATlONS
14June 1971.
The Registrar ofthe international Court of Justice presents his compliments
to the Legal Counsel and, with reference to Article 67 of the Statute of the
Court and to the oral statement made on behalf of the Sccrctary-General OF
the United Nations in the proceedings concerning the request of the Security
Council of the United Nations for an advisory opinion on the LegulÇonseguen-
cesfur Stures of fhe ContinuedPresence of SourizAfrica in Namibia (Souih
WesrAJricuJ noiwifksranrliri,SecurltyCoutzcilResoI~~fio276 (1970), has the
honourto statc that the Advisory Opinion of the Court will be delivered at a
public sitting to be held at 1a.m. on Monday, 21 June 1971.
105. THE REGISTRAR TO THE SECRETARY-CENERAL OF THE UNITET) NATIONS
(telegram)
21 June 1971.
Advisory Opinion delivcredthis morning. Court isof opinion
by 13votes to 2,
(1) that, the continued presence of South Africa in Namibia being illegal,
South Africa is under obligation to withdraw its administration from
Naniibia irnniediatelyand thus pritan end to its occupationof the Territory;
Voir ci-dessusp. 605.
The çame cumniunication was sentto the:representativeof the Governments
ofthe following States: FinlanIndia,the Netherlands, Nigeria, Pakistan, Republic
of Viet-Nam, South Africa and United States ofArnerica, andofthe Organization
of African Unity.
' I.C.J. Reports 1971p. 16.'by 11 votes to4,
(2) that States Members of the United Nations are under obligation to re-
cugnizetheillegalitof South Africa'spresencein Namibiaand the invalidity
of irs actson behalf of or concerning Namibia, and to refrain from any
acFsand in particular anydealings wilh the Govemment of South Africa
implying recognition of thelegality of,orlending support or assistance to,
such presence and administration;
(3) that it is incumbent upon States which are not Members of the United
Nations to give assistance, within the scope of subparagraph (2)above, in
the action which has beentaken by the United Nations wiih regard tu
Namibis.
Declaration by President; Separate Opinions by Ammoun, Padilla, Petkn,
Onyeama, Dillard, Castro; DissentingOpinions by Fitmaudoe, Gros.
106. THE REGISTRAR TO THE SECRRTARY-GENERALOF TRI3 UNITED NATIONS
21 June 1971.
I have thehonour to send you by aismail, under separate cover, two copies
of the Advisory Opinion given today by the International Courr of Justice
on theLegalCon~eqcences forStates of the Coniint~edPreseneof Sourli Africa
in N~mibia (South West Africa) notwiihslatzdingSecurity CouricilResolutim
276 (1976).
In pursuance of Article 85,paragraph 2, of the Rules ol'court, one original
copy of the Opinion, duly signed and sealed, is beingsent to youby surface
mail.
107. LE GREFFIER ADJOINT AU MlNlSTRE DES AFFAIRES
ÉTRANGÈREJ D'AFGHANISTAN l
28 juin 1911.
Conformément à l'article 85, paragraphe 2, du Règlenient de la Cour, j'ai
l'honneur de transmettre sous ce pli un exemplaire certifit conforme de !%vis
consultatif rendu par la Cour internationale de Justice sur les Conséqueizces
juridiquespour les Etors de laprésence contînue de l'Afriquedu Sud en Namibie
(Sud-Ouestafricain) nanobstanila résolution276 (1970) du Conseil de sécurité.
D'autres exemplaires seront expidies ultérieurement par la voie ordinaire
conformément aux indicationsdonnéesa cc sujet par votre Gouvernement.
l Unec~rnmunication analogliea etéadressée àtousles autres Etatsadmis ester
devant la Cour etA l'Organisationdel'unité africaine.
Correspondence