in The Italian Yearbook of International Law Online
Restricted Access
Get Access to Full Text
Rent on DeepDyve

Have an Access Token?

Enter your access token to activate and access content online.

Please login and go to your personal user account to enter your access token.


Have Institutional Access?

Access content through your institution. Any other coaching guidance?



in The Italian Yearbook of International Law Online


1 The text of the articles mentioned in the two statements can be found in YILC (1978) II, 2, p. 124 ff.

1 For the text of the article cited, see YILC (1978), II, 2, p. 16 ff.

1 For the text of the article cited, see YILC (1978), II, 2, p. 16 ff.

1 The text of the articles mentioned in the two statements can be found in YILC (1978) II, 2, p. iI ff.

1 Para. 11 reads as follows: 11. Supports the armed struggle of the Namibian people, led by the South West Africa People's Organization, to achieve self-determination, freedom and national independence in a united Namibia.

1 For the discussion held in the Senate see AP, Senate, VII Legislature, Debates, p. 12764 ff.

1 Rule 90, para. i, reads as follows: With a view to reaching a decision on the admissibility of a communication, the Com- mittee shall ascertain: (a) that the communication is not anonymous and that it emanates from an individual, or individuals, subject to the jurisdiction of a State party to the Protocol; (b) that the individual claims to be a victim of a violation by that State party of any of the rights set forth in the Covenant. Normally, the communication should be submitted by the individual himself or by his representative; the Committee may, however, accept to consider a communication submitted on behalf of an alleged victim when it appears that he is unable to submit the communication himself; (c) that the communication is not an abuse of the right to submit a communication under the Protocol; (d) that the communication is not incompatible with the provisions of the Covenant; (e) that the same matter is not being examined under another procedure of inter- national investigation or settlement; (/) that the individual has exhausted all available domestic remedies. 2 Paragraphs 150 and 151 of the report (Doc A/32/44) referred to in the Italian statement read as follows: 150. In a number of cases the Committee decided to transmit the communications to the State party concerned under rule 91 of its provisional rules of procedure, requesting from the State party information and observations relevant to the question of admissibility. In several of these cases, the Committee also decided to request additional information from the authors, mainly on the grounds and circumstances justifying their acting on behalf of the alleged victims, including the authors' reasons for believing that the alleged victims would approve the authors' acting on their behalf and the authors' reasons for believing that the alleged victims are unable to act on their own behalf. 151. In some instances, the authors were requested to furnish information on the efforts made or steps taken by the alleged victims or on their behalf to exhaust domestic remedies, or to give details of the facts of unsubstantial allegations, and, in one instance, to furnish additional concerning the identity of the alleged victims on whose behalf the author was acting. Rule 91 of the provisional rules of procedure of the Committee is drafted in the follow- ing way: i. The Committee or a Working Group established under rule 88 may, through the

Secretary-General, request the State party concerned or the author of the communication to submit additional written information or observations relevant to the question of admissi- bility of the communication. The Committee or the Working Group shall indicate a time- limit for the submission of such information or observations with a view to avoiding undue delay. 2. A communication may not be declared admissible unless the State party concerned has received the text of the communication and has been given an opportunity to furnish infor- mation or observations as provided in paragraph i of this rule. 3. A request under paragraph i of this rule shall include a statement of the fact that such a request does not imply that any decision has been reached on the question of admissibility.

1 Para. g of the Preamble reads as follows: Determined to promote the implementation of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimina- tion, the International Covenants on Human Rights, the International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid, the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, the Discrimination (Employment and Occupation) Convention (1958) of the International Labour Organisation and the Convention against Discrimination in Education (1960) of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. 2 Para. 6 of the Preamble reads as follows: Endorsing the Programme of Action against Apartheid adopted by the General Assembly on 9 November 1976, the Lagos Declaration for Action against Apartheid (1977), the Maputo Declaration in Support of the Peoples of Zimbabwe and Namibia and Programme of Action for the Liberation of Zimbabwe and Namibia (1977), and the International Seminar on the Eradication of Apartheid and in Support Struggle for Liberation in South Africa, held at Havana, Cuba, in 1976. 3 Para. i (viii) of the Programme of Action reads as follows: The taking of all necessary measures by all States, all their national sports organizations

and individuals within their jurisdiction to prohibit racial discrimination in sports and to disallow any sports contact with the racist regimes of southern Africa or with racially selected teams and individuals from the racist regimes of southern Africa and to promote sports activities with no trace of racial distinction whatsoover. 4 Para. 15 of the Programme of Action reads as follows: The Conference proclaims that racism, racial discrimination and apartheid in all their manifestations are crimes against the conscience and dignity of mankind, and must be eradicated by effective international action. It reaffirms the special responsibility of the United Nations and the international community to the oppressed peoples of South Africa, Namibia, Zimbabwe, Palestine and their liberation movements. The Conference requests the Security Council to consider urgently the imposition of comprehensive and mandatory sanc- tions, under Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations, against the apartheid regime of South Africa and the racist regimes of southern Africa, and in particular: (i) the cessation of all collaboration with South Africa in the nuclear field; (ii) the prohibition of all technological assistance or collaboration in the manufacture of arms and military supplies in South Africa; (iii) the prohibition of all loans to and investments in South Africa and the termination of all promotion of trade with South Africa; (iv) an embargo on the supply of petroleum, petroleum products and other strategic commodities to South Africa.

5 The above-mentioned paragraphs of the Declaration read as follows: 4. Apartheid, the extreme form of institutionalized racism, is a crime against humanity and an affront to the dignity of mankind and is a threat to peace and security in the world. 7. All those who profit from racist domination and exploitation in South Africa, or assist the apartheid regime, or facilitate the propaganda in favour of apartheid, are accomplices in the perpetuation of this crime against humanity. 13. The elimination of racial discrimination being an imperative norm of international community, the exercise of competing rights such as freedom of association or expression cannot be used as justifying the propagation of racist ideas; Governments have a duty to ensure that priority is given in their national legislation to prohibiting racial discrimination and to proscribing the dissemination, including dissemination through mass media, of racist ideas and also to actively discouraging any propaganda supporting racism and racist regime in accordance with Art. 4 oaf the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination. i4. In southern Africa, the most extreme form of racism, compounded by settler colo- nialism, has led to the worst form of exploitation and human degradation. 15. The creation of bantustans is a diabolical manoeuvre designed to dispossess the African people of their land and to consolidate the political and economic white settler domination which the world community should continue to reject and condemn. 6 Paragraphs 2 and 3 of the Programme of Action read as follows: The Conference recognizes that action against racism would be more effective if it were combined with determined efforts in the field of education at all levels. The Conference

therefore urges Governments to design school curricula and other educational programmes exposing the myths and fallacies of all theories, philosophies, ideas, attitudes and practices based on differences of race, colour, descent, ethnic or national origin. The Conference also urges States to provide adequate opportunities in schools and institutions of higher learning for the study of United Nations measures to combat racism. The Conference urges States also to disseminate educational material against racism through institutions other than formal educational institutions; for example, youth movements, women's organizations, trade unions, art and drama societies, etc. To this end, the Conference urges States to choose procedures of instruction that are appropriate to their respective countries. Consideration should also be given to ways and means through which communica- tion media and non-governmental organizations may be encouraged to propagate the goals and objectives of the Programme for the Decade. For the text of para. 15, see note 4 above.

1 The 24 May 1978 Declaration of the Presidency of the Nine reads as follows: Against the background of the recent sentencing of Soviet citizens who have been engaged in monitoring the implementation of the Helsinki Final Act by the Soviet Union,

including the case against Mr. Yuri Orlov, the Governments of the nine Member States of the European Community wish to state the following: The Nine have consistently deployed their joint efforts in an endeavour to promote a policy of detente in Europe. They have demonstrated their determination in this respect, for intance by their active contributions to the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe and to the follow up to that Conference. The Nine, who consider that the Helsinki Final Act constitutes a programme of action for detente, recall that in this document signed by their Heads of State or Government the participating States have committed themselves to respect human rights and fundamental freedoms and have confirmed the right of the individual to know and act upon his rights and duties in this field. This is why the Governments of the Nine find it incompatible with the Final Act and with detente that individuals should be prosecuted and sentenced for having demanded the implementation of the Final Act in their own country. (Bulletin of the European Communities (1978), No. 5, p. 63).

1 For the statement of the Italian Delegate at the XXXI Session of the General Assembly, see 3 Yearbook (1977), p. 433 ff.

2 The amendment was abandoned by France at a later stage.

3 The articles of the German draft quoted in the statement read as follows: Article r i. Any person who seizes or detains another person (hereinafter referred to as " hostage ") and threatens with death or severe injury or continued detention of that person in order to compel: (a) a third person; ( b ) a body corporate under national law; (c) a state or; (d) an international organization or international conference to do or abstain from doing anything commits and act of taking hostages, an offence within the meaning of this Convention. 2. Any person who: (a) attempts to commit an act of taking hostages, or; (b) is an accomplice on anyone who commits or attempts to commit an act of taking hostages; also commits an offence within the meaning of this Convention. Article 3 i. Each Contracting State in whose territory the offender is present with his hostage shall take such measures as it deems appropriate to ease the situation of the hostage and to secure his release. 2. After the hostage has been freed the Contracting State in whose territory he is present will facilitate his prompt departure from the country. 3. If any object which the offender has illegally acquired as a result of the taking of hostages comes into the custody of a Contracting State, that Contracting State shall return it promptly to the person entitled to possession. Article 4 Each Contracting State shall make the offences mentioned in Art. i punishable by severe penalties. Article 7 i. The Contracting State in the territory of which the alleged offender is found shall, if it does not extradite him, be obliged, without exception whatsoever and whether or not the offence committed in its territory, to submit the case to its competent authorities for the purpose of prosecution. Those authorities shall take their decision in the same manner as in the case of any ordinary offence of a serious nature under the law of that State. 2. Any person regarding whom proceedings are being carried out in connexion with any of the offences set forth in Art. i shall be guaranteed fair treatment at all stages of the proceedings.

1 The text of the articles mentioned in the two statements can be found in YILC (1978), II, 2, p. 78 ff.

1 Which became Res. 32/130 of 16 December 1977, adopted by 123 votes in favour and 15 abstentions. Italy abstained.

1 The first steps taken with regard to the initiative in question, as well as the relevant parts of the Draft Treaty introduced by the USSR are reported in 3 Yearbook (1977), p. 449 fl.

1 Para. 6 of draft Resolution reads as follows: 6. Strongly condemn all States which collaborate politically, diplomatically, economically and militarily with South Africa in flagrant violation of the relevant United Nations resolu- tions, particularly the United States of America, France, the United Kingdom, the Federal Republic of Germany, Israel, Japan, Belgium and Italy. The draft Resolution was adopted with the same wording by the Fourth Committee and, subsequently by the General Assembly as Resolution 32/35 of 28 November 1977. Italy voted against.

2 Para. 6 reads as follows: 6. Strongly condemns the collusion of all States which collaborate politically, diplo- matically, economically and militarily with South Africa in flagrant violation of the relevant United Nations resolutions, particularly that of Belgium, France, the Federal Republic of Germany, Israel, Italy, Japan, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the United States of America.

3 Paragraphs 2 and 8 of Resolution 33/q.4 read as follows: 2. Affirms once again that the continuation of colonialism in all its forms and manifesta- tions - including racism apartheid, the exploitation by foreign and other interests of economic and human resources, and the waging of colonial wars to suppress the national liberation movements of the colonial Territories in Africa - is incompatible with the Charter of the United Nations, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples and poses a serious threat to international peace and security. 8. Strongly condemns all collaboration, particularly in the nuclear and military fields, with the Government of South Africa and calls upon the States concerned to cease forthwith all such collaboration.


Content Metrics

Content Metrics

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 16 16 4
Full Text Views 6 6 0
PDF Downloads 0 0 0
EPUB Downloads 0 0 0