Assembly 52.

Committee 6. Rules of Procedure. (Two year term).

1. Reference Assembly 39 and your UND.19. [1] Sub-Committee of
Committee 6 on rules of procedure has now discussed Rule 78 [2]
and supplementary rule S [3] governing term of office of states
recently elected to Councils.

2. The Egyptian delegation proposed to repeal supplementary Rule S
and replace Rule 78 by the following rule 'the term of office of
each member shall begin immediately upon election provided the
seat to which such member has been elected is vacant or if
election takes place before the expiry of the term of office of a
member previously elected immediately it becomes vacant'. This was
strongly opposed by the United Kingdom, United States of America
and Union of Soviet Socialist Republics as leading permanently to
lame duck sessions of Councils since regular [sessions] of the
Assembly would have to meet in September as now provided by Rule 1
and thus term of office of all states elected to Councils would
expire in January of the relevant year.

3. The Yugoslav representative greatly embarrassed by the
circumstances of Yugoslavia's election to the Economic and Social
Council [4] suggested an interpretive resolution declaring that
for the purposes of the Charter the term 'year' in Articles 23, 61
and 86 means a 'working year' that is to say the period between
one regular session of the Assembly and the next. This was not a
formal motion but received some approval and may well be adopted
in substance by the Assembly's expressing the general intention of
the charter.

4. The United Kingdom Representative moved (in opposition to the
Egyptian proposal) that Rule 78 should be maintained, the
changeover of members of Councils, thus Yugoslavia's election to
the Economic and Social Council, continuing to take place at the
time of election by the Assembly but that the Assembly itself
should decide whether the terms of office of members elected at
this session should be determined in accordance with Rule S or
extended by a further year as suggested by the French
Representative.

5. Having regard to your express instructions, the Australian
representative maintained that the solution embodied in
supplementary Rule S does not comply with the Charter and reserved
our position on its validity but did not commit us to any specific
amendment of the rules.

6. Egypt, Lebanon and China also contended that the solution
contained in Rule S is unconstitutional.

7. The Egyptian proposal was defeated and the United Kingdom
proposal was carried in the sub-committee which will report to the
full committee on Monday.

8. The result of the Sub-Committee's debate is that the whole
position will be reopened in the Assembly. Australia has been
extremely fortunate in that by filing a formal amendment last
week, Egypt has had the initial responsibility for raising the
matter.

9. Under supplementary Rule S, Egypt will occupy a seat on
Security Council for eight months, Australia for 20 months. Our
term will expire according to Rule 1 and Rule S when elections are
held at Assembly session in September 1947. On a strict reading of
the Charter it should of course be four months longer ending in
January, 1948. All governments at Preparatory Commission accepted
Rule S and elections in January were expressly conducted on that
basis.

10. What is being said here is that to have accepted the election
under Rule S, and then seek to question the Rule and thereby gain
an extended term is a distinct breach of faith. In the abstract
the juridical arguments are admitted to be strong though literal
but the governments pressing them at this stage are openly
regarded as insincere. Except for China which voted for both
motions in sub-committee the only support for Egypt has come from
states that have recently been elected to councils for short term.

11. The full effect could be given to the Charter either by
holding the Assembly regularly in January or by holding it in
September as the rules now provide and postponing the changeover
in councils until January as in the Egyptian proposal. On climatic
and other grounds, the first solution will certainly be ruled out.

There are strong practical objections to the second. The case for
Rule S rests on its purely transitional character as a solution of
the timetable difficulties arising from postponement until January
of the first session of the Assembly. In the present atmosphere we
think that the Assembly will emphatically uphold-Rule S probably
on the basis of some interpretive declaration.

12. The whole matter is now complicated by the likelihood of
further meeting of the Assembly between the present meetings and
September session by the uncertainty whether the September session
is to be regarded as the second regular session or as the second
part of the first session.

13. There is no foundation whatever for the suggestion that our
actions and advice on this matter have been influenced by any
other factor than Australia's interests as the delegation here
after discussion sees them.

14. The crux of the present situation is that the debate cannot be
kept on a purely juridical plane. Politically, everything turns on
the fact that all members including Australia accepted Rule S
before the elections. Consequently, whether freely or not the
Egyptian move is regarded as merely an attempt to win by an
unmerited technicality an extra four months of office for
themselves. The Delegation thinks it essential to avoid any course
which would break down Australia's position and your own as a
disinterested and independent representative of the secondary
states. We have made effective use of all constitutional arguments
but think it necessary at this stage to be granted some discretion
as the situation develops in accepting the best possible practical
solution.