UNITED NATIONS THIRD CONFERENCE ON THE LAW OF THE SEA, THIRD SESSION, GENERAL COMMITTEE, PROVISIONAL SUMMARY RECORD OF THE TWELFTH MEETING

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP82S00697R000300120012-1
• Release Decision: RIFPUB
• Original Classification: R
• Document Page Count: 11
• Document Creation Date: December 12, 2016
• Document Release Date: May 22, 2002
• Sequence Number: 12
• Publication Date: May 5, 1975
• Content Type: SUMMARY

Approved For Release 2002/06/14: CIA-RDP82SO0697R000300120012-1
UNITED NATIONS
THIRD CONFERENCE ON THE
LAW OF THE SEA
Third Session
GENERAL COMMITTEE
Distr.
RESTRICTED
5 May 1975
ENGLISH
Original: FRENCH
PROVISIONAL SUMMARY RECORD OF THE TWELFTH MEETING
held at the Palais des Nations, Geneva,
on Friday, 2 May 1975 at 10 a.m.
Chairman: Mr. AME1?ASINGHE Sri Lanka
Rapporteur General: Mr. RATTRAY Jamaica
CONTENTS:
Time, venue and duration of the next session
question of inter-sessional arrangements for informal consultations
and negotiations
N.B. Participants wishing to have corrections to this provisional summary record
incorporated in the final summary record of the meeting are requested to submit
them in writing in quadruplicate, preferably on a copy of the record itself, to
the Official Records Editing Section, room E.4108,.Palais des Nations, Geneva,
within five working days of receiving the provisional record in their working
language.
A/CONF.62/BUR/SR.12
GE.75-65091
AproveU-oFo Fie e1eass 2002106/14 : LYA-RDP82S00697Rooe30042DG1-2-1----
 Approved For Release 2002/06/14: CIA-RDP82SO0697R000300120012-1
TIME, VENUE AND DURATION OF THE NEXT SESSION
Xr. . DGE (Secretariat) said that the competent departments of the
United Nations Office at Geneva and the United Nations Departmr-it of Conference Services
in New York had considered the possibility of accommodating the next session of the
Conference early in 1976 for a period roughly equivalent to that of the present session
and with equivalent services. The Conference could meet at Geneva between 19 January and
5 March, or in New York between 2 February and 9 April, without any great change in the
calendar of conferences in New York or Geneva. If the Conference met in New York after
9 April, it would overlap with the session of the Economic and Social Council which was
to begin on that date, and consequently would not be able to make simultaneous use of
the three large conference rooms it needed.
Mr. TRAQRE (Ivory Coast), Chairman of the African Group, said that the African
Group, like the entire Group of 77, would prefer the next session of the Conference to be
held in a developing country in Africa, Asia or Latin America. It was not yet in a
position to give a final opinion on the matter, but thought the Conference could not
contemplate holding its next session in New York or Geneva unless it was impossible to
hold it in a developing country.
Mr. SAb-VAZIRI (Iran), Chairman of the Asian Group, said that most of the
Asian Group would prefer the Conference to hold its next session in a developing country
in Asia or Africa. if none of those countries offered to have the Conference, its choice
would be New York or, failing that, Geneva. It would prefer the Conference-to start in
April 1976, but had not yet considered the question of its duration.
. ZEA ("- l.ombia), Chairoar. of th-, Group of Latin Anprican States, said that
although some Latin American countries would have preferred the Conference to meet again
during the coming summer, the Group of Latin American States had decided to reject that
possibility and hoped that the next session would be held early in 1976. In a spirit of
solidarity with the Group of 77, the Latin American States would prefer the Conference to
meet in a developing country in Asia, Africa or Latin America. If that was not possible,
it would agree to the next session being held in New York or Geneva, but would prefer
New York. The Group of Latin American States had not yet considered the question of the
duration of the session, but he, personally, thought it should be at least eight weeks,
so as to have time to discuss all the items on the agenda.
A/CONF.62/BUR/SR.12
Approved For Release-2002/06/14: ZTA-RDP82S00697R000300120012-1
 Approved For Release 2002/06/14: CIA-RDP82SO0697R000300120012-1
Mr. VINDENES (Norway) said that the Group of Western European and other
States., of which he was Chairman, had not yet considered the item on the agenda.
Mr. KOZYREV (Union of Soviet Socialist Republics) said that the Group of
Eastern European States, of which he was Chairman, saw no objection to the Conference
holding its next session in a developing country; quite the contrary. But since
the Conference had not yet been invited by any developing country, it would
probably have to.choose between Geneva and New York. As to the date and duration
of the next session, the Group of Eastern European States agreed to the dates
proposed by the Secretariat and believed that the session should last at least
eight weeks.
Mr. STEVENSON (United States of America) said he thought eight weeks
would hardly suffice for the Conference to complete the enormous task that awaited
it, and would prefer the next session to be one or more weeks longer.
. ENGO (United Republic of Cameroon) said that in view of the severe
winter in New York, he would prefer the next session of the Conference to begin there
in April.
The CHAIRMAN invited the regional groups to continue consideration of the
question and said that the Secretariat would study the United States representative's
proposal that the session should be of longer duration.
QUESTION OF INTER-SESSIONAL ARRANGEMENTS FOR INFORMAL CONSULTATIONS AND NEGOTIATIONS
Mr. ARIAS SCHREIBER (Peru) said that for financial and economic reasons
connected with the calendar of international activities of the different countries
concerned, it would is difficult, if not imiossible, to hold .meetings at the
Conference level before the next session. He did not, for those reasons, rule out
the possibility of holding private meetings outside of the Conference, but he
emphasized that such meetings would have no official standing and, consequently,
would involve no commitment on the part of participating States. In any event, he
was categorically opposed to any meetings, official or informal, which would be held
within the framework of the Conference, since that, in his opinion, would amount to
holding another session during the year. He thought that in any case the Conference
did not.need to. take an official decision on the matter.
A/CONF.62/BUR/SR.12
Approved For Release 2002%06/14 CTA-RDP82S00697R0003001-20042-1
 Approved For Release 2002/06/14: CIA-RDP82SO0697R000300120012-1
The C' aifi,AN said that mere vas no c.uestiun ci holdin informal meetinLn at
the Conference level. .3ut i; the various rcLional rou}s and interest rooms needed
to hold informal cc vsuitations and ne; otia_ions between the E salons they should inform
the Secretariat in advance, so that it could -:lace tmie necess .ry rooms and services
at their dis-)osa1.
i- ir. GO (United Re )ublic of Cameroon, said he thouht it voull be very
useful to hold informal coasultations and negotiations betveca sessions, since
governments would have ~.:, study carefully the sir,;le texts to be submitted to them and
should have an o.iportuoity of exchan inv~ vies on the sub?ect. The consultations
would have to be held at he level of re;,ional ~Xou,-s and interest ;rout's. The
Secretariats at Geneva and Neu Yor:, should be asked to ..rovide those rowis vith the
meeting rooms and services they would need. U`,' course, it as for delegations to
initiate consultations between Lroups.
M. YAN::OV (Bul;,aria; said he (.&s in favour of any initiative aimed at
orZanizin inter-sessional informal consultations and negotiations betireen the d-ilerent
frou,)s. He believed, however, that such informal meeiin_s could be useful only ii
they were sufficiently re resen hive of the Trends t:hich had ,3:ner;,ed c ~ the previous
session. furthermore, he considered that, durin? sessions; informal consultations and
negotiations bet',eer. ;_rou )s should not have : riority over me:etin,s, i,uormal or
official, held as prr. of the Con:erence itself, and should not encroach on the time
devoted to iaeatiu,,.s of Uw Con.:erence and its cowmitteeu. Ic: that connexion, he
observed that on several occasions committee meetings had had to be cancelled because they
coincided with informal meetings of ,rouge. He reco&nized t?e ittr_>ortance of informal
meetings held within the frane:.?or: of the Conference, W=hich had ;roved very productive
des,?ite the aio?r ,,)roi,resn nade, bu;: 7:e thou,,ht the ;,rou_ s should hold fever meetir.js
durin;; sessions, so as not to encroach on the time reserved for mec:tin.,-B of the
Conference.
Mr. BAKNES (Liberia) said he shared .he o?inion exi;ressed by the representa-
tive of Peru and wondered ^hether the Conference should deiire terms of reference for
inter-sessional meetings.
A, ONT .6, /BUA,'SR.1
Approved For Release 2002/06/14: CIA-RDP82SO0697R000300120012-1
 Approved For Release 2002/06/14: CIA-RDP82S00697R000300120012-1
The C]IAIRhAN said that the aim was not to assign terms of reference to
informal meetings and that members of the General Committee should confine themselves
to indicating whetiier they wished the Secretariat to provide the services such meetings
.might need.
Mr. (Chiles said that his delegation had been in favour of reconvening
the Conference during the current year, but since that possibility had been ruled out,
it was in favour of holding another session as soon as possible. Furthermore, he
thought the single negotiating texts should be discussed before the end of the session
and he asked the Chairman what he ;.iroposed in that resaect. Governments should have
an opportunity of making. their views '__nown, if only by sending their comments to the
Secretariat between sessions. Since it was essential to hold inter-sessional
consultations, the necessary services should be made available, without, however,
laying dorm terms of reference for such meeti:ugs. He suggested taking advantage of
the General Assembly session to arrange informal meetings.
The C IRI,iAN said that at the fifty-fifth plenary meeting of the Conference,
held on 18 April 1975, he had discussed the scope and purpose of the single negotiating
texts. He saw no objection to governments sending their comments to the Secretariat,
but in his opinion a general debate on the single texts could not be held, since that
would re-open the problem and it would then be impossible to negotiate.
Dir. STEVENSON (United States of America) said he supported the statement made
by the representative of Chile and considered that another session of the Conference
should be held as early as possible in 1976. In addition, he thought the Secretariat
should provide logistical support for inter-sessional work and that it would be
counterproductive to lay down precise terms of reference for informal meetings.
Given the existence of single texts, the character of the next session would be
somewhat different from that of the current one. The informal meetings held at the
current session had gathered momentum and it was important that their wor'_: should
continue at the same pace. Inter-sessional work, and in particular, agreement on
single amendments would therefore be useful.
A/CONF.62/BUR/SR.1:
Approved For Release 200 6/14: CIA-RDP82S00697R000300120012-1 --
 Approved For Release 2002/06/14: CIA-RDP82S00697R000300120012-1
t1r~OGUNDr. I (Ni;,eria; said he was oa,.)osed to holdint informal meetin,;s
between sessions, since sin-le ne,;otiatin? texts would be available, the Conference
could proceed in the same way as all other codification conferences.
For countries which could count on the services of a sufficient number of lawyers,
it was of little im-;ortance whether the next session vas held in six raoinths time or
even earlier. The same was not true of other countries, ho,.-ever, and he thought that
governments should be ~ iveu time to study the documents, to re,lect and to evaluate
the work done, in order to decide what compromise they could reach.
Nevertheless, the fact remained that the members of retlo:.al Z~rou>s should continue
their consultations, if only to _~revent the .proliferation of amendments. i!e wondered
whether it would not be ,ossible to arran:v semi-official consultations durin: the
General Assembly.
1k. YASS}.;HH (Ira_), after observing that the "ash of the Conference called
for considerable effort, said that althourh considerable pro;re3a had been made durinj,
the session, it would not enable the Conference to achieve its objective in the near
future. One of the reasons for the situation was that the :rearator,; ;period had
been too short and there had been no official document on which the Conference could
base its work. That had not been the case in 1956 at the conference convened to
consider the texts )re,,ared by the I.:ternational Law Commiesio3a, when a ain:le session
of the conference had sufficed or the examination and ado-.Aioa of those documents.
He therefore thou;,,wt it a>ro.~riate to reconsider the Conference's methods of ?ror::.
It would be advisable to invite ;overniente to ma.ce fond ::ce of the time be'cween
the sessions; he suCGes4ed the establisluieat by the Conference or by the General
Assembly of an ad hoc coruaittee responsible for ;re1arit drafts and layin;; the le.al
foundations of the new law of the sea. Sues a conai.ttee could com?rise ,5 to 50
States re_2resentin;, he di;.erent ;,eo raphioal regions and the various interests. It
would meet between the sessions and its cork would be of an official character.
However, it would not be a .-)ermanent body and its objective should be the .?reparation of
an integral draft.
A/'CONF.6LjBUR, SR.1'.
Approved -For-Re lease 2002/06/14 : FA-RDP82S00697R000300120012-1
 Approved For Release 2002/06/14: CIA-RDP82S00697R000300120012-1
The CHAIRMAN remarked that the suggestion of the representative of Iraq was
similar to one which he himself had made earlier and which, had not been favourably
received. On the otaer hand, it would be de irable to make ma_i um use of the Drafting
Committee.
Mr. BEESLEY (Chairman of the Drafting Committee) said that, as stated in its
report, the Drafting Committee had met officially and had agreed to meet again, but
informally. If the President of the Conference or the Chairman of a Committee referred
a text to the Drafting Committee, it would meet informally to consider the text, but it
could not in any circumstances serve as a vehicle for consultations or negotiations.
The Drafting Committee must comply with its terms of reference and it would have a
specific role when the Conference reached a certain stage in its work. If a negotiating
text was submitted to it, the Drafting Committee could consider the legal issues
involved, but only informally.
Mr. REDADI (Tunisia) wondered whether the General Committee was discussing
the question of inter-sessional arrangements for informal consultations and negotiations,
or the question of the possibility of the Drafting Committee's meeting informally to put
single negotiating texts into legal language.
He did not share the view of the Chairman of the Drafting Committee and considered
that it was not within the terms of reference of the Drafting Committee to meet in order
to give legal form to single negotiating texts. In his opinion, the Drafting Committee
could only act after the Conference had taken the requisite political decisions.
Although the President's suggestions were intended to accelerate the work of the
Conference, they had not been followed for reasons which had been explained by the
representatives of developing countries. To give a mandate to inter-sessional meetings
would, in fact, be equivalent to convening a session; moreover, meetings of a more or
less official character were inconceivable without the participation of all the members
of the Conference. As to the idea of a committee of "wise men", the Conference had
always rejected it for economic and financial reasons, among others. What was more,
the decision which had been taken to draw up single negotiating texts constituted a
new factor. Those texts, which would serve as the basis for future negotiations,
would have to be communicated to governments for consideration, which would require a
certain amount of time.
A/CONF.62/BTJR/Sk.12
Approved For Release 2002T06/1-4 CIARDPS2S00697R0003001C20012-1
 Approved For Release 2002/06/14: CIA-RDP82S00697R000300120012-1
He did not think that meetings of regional or interest groups had interfered with
committee meetings, but he would ask the Secretariat to ensure that at the next session,
sufficient time was allowed for meetings of joth the Conference and the groups.
In conclusion, he expressed the view that the President of the Conference might
appeal to msmmbers to hold private meetings between the sessions but that the Conference
should refrain from giving them instructions and should not adopt any decisions.
Mr. BAILEY (Australia) considered that the Drafting Committee should confine
itself to the role assigned to it and that it could play no part in the form of
inter-sessional activities connected with consultations or negotiations. The suggestion
of the representative of Iraq might have intrinsic value but he did not see how the
Conference would be able to reach agreement on the 35 or 50 persona to be elected to the
proposed ad hoc committee; the only possibility would be a composition similar to that
of the General Committee. While it was not possible tooreate an ad hoc consultative
committee, consultations and group or inter-group meetings could be held during the
inter-sessional period with a view to reducing the number of amendments. Like the
representatives of the United States and Nigeria, he considered it necessary to ensure
that the next session did not begin with an avalanche of amendments. Any amendments
should only be circulated at the final stage, after governments had carefully studied
the texts and after the groups had met.
The CHAIRMAN said that the creation of an official group which would meet
between sessions for the purpose of negotiations was far from receiving general approval
and that the plenary Conference had not given any mandate to that effect. The General
Committee was only called upon to decide whether it favoured informal inter-sessional
negotiations.
MT. KNOKE (Federal Republic of Germany) said that the. next session should
avoid holding a general debate, Once delegations had returned home with the unified
texts prepared by the chairmen of committees a four-stage operation should be initiated:
detailed study of the texts by governments, meetings of regional and interest groups,
contacts between the main interest groups and, if necessary, informal use of the services
of the Drafting Committee. The next session should not be held too early so as to interest
enough time for those four stages. The inter-sessional meetings of regional
A/C ONF. 62/BIYR/JR.12
Approved For Release 2002/06/14 CIA-RDP82S00697R000300120012-1
 Approved For Release 2002/06/14: CIA-RDP82S00697R000300120012-1
groups could take place during the session of the General Assembly at New York and the
Secretariat would be called upon to meet logistical requirements.
Mr. SCHREIBER (Peru) noted that the idea of an ad hoc committee now appeared
to have been abandoned and moreover that it was not possible to entrust the Drafting
Committee with functions other than those provided for in rule 53 of the Rules of
Procedure. The Drafting Committee could not exercise those functions on unified texts
intended simply to provide a basis for subsequent negotiations. There remained the
possibility of holding informal meetings between the sessions for which the Secretariats
logistical support would be needed. Such informal meetings would be between persons
participating in their individual capacity and as their results would not be of an
official character they could not be involved in the subsequent deliberations.
Mr. RABETAFIKA (Madagascar) said that his delegation was absolutely opposed
to any "institutionalization" of consultations and any forced negotiations, which could
only produce the results contrary to those desired. Groups wishing to meet between the
sessions could do so informally and would ask the Secretariat for the services and
accommodation required. Such arrangements should remain flexible because of the
possibility of rapprochements or realignments. His delegation had very definite
reservations about the idea of an ad hoc committee particularly because of the difficulties
that would arise over its membership. As to the Drafting Committee, it should only work
on official documents on which the Conference had reached agreement, whereas the unified
or single texts to be prepared by the chairmen'of committees would not be official.
In any case, it was understandable and desirable that all delegations should seek to
narrow their differences at the bilateral, the group and the inter-group level.
Mr. ICOZYREV (Union of Soviet Socialist Republics) noted. that there was
agreement that decisions should be reached by consensus. The very cvnvtruotive
suggestion by the Chairman reflected his hope that the Conference would end with a
convention acceptable to all. As the Tunisian representative had said, the Conference
was dealing with questions that were essentially political. That was why all States
should be invited to take part in the inter-sessional consultations suggested by the
Chairman. If some of them could not send a representative care could be taken that
their interests were represented in the groups. The consultations should be informal
and should be directed to unofficial texts submitted by the chairmen of committees in
A/CONF.62/BUR/aR.12
Approved For Release 2002/06/14: CIA-RDP82S00697R000300120012-1
 Approved For Release 2002/06/14: CIA-RDP82SO0697R000300120012-1
their personal capacity. Those consultations should be held under the auspices of the
President of the Confeerence. When they should be held could be determined in the light
of the availability of the New York or Geneva services: meetings could be arranged, for
example, just before or during the next session of the General Assembly.
The CHAIRMAN said that as the consultations were not to be "institutionalized"
no invitations would be sent. The initiative for holding such consultations would rest
with those wishing to have them. He himself was prepared to offer his services to those
who asked for them.
Mr. M )JAD (Algeria) said that his delegation was against the creation of an
ad hog committee, which would undoubtedly result in an excessive number of variants.
He asked whether the Secretariat's logistical support would be limited to consultation
meetings at New York or Geneva or whether it would also be provided for meetings held
elsewhere, for example, in connexion with meetings of regional groups.
The CHAIRMAN said that such support would be provided only at New York or
Geneva. In any other case the express authorization of the General Assembly would be
needed.
Mr,OGISO (Japan) believed it should be left to the chairmen of the three
Committees to convene consultation meetings between the sessions as they thought
necessary. Participation in such meetings should be open to all.
Mr. de LACHARRIERE (France) said that it would be preferable not to discuss
now proposals which had failed to gain wide support. The proposals which had clearly
received such support were those which had been made by the Chairman and had been
endorsed by several representatives including the representatives of Tunisia, the Soviet
Union, the Federal Republic of Germany and Peru and which provided that at the current
stage governments should ponder on the proposals and groups should plan to work between
the sessions. It was certainly not desirable to "institutionalize" those consultations.
The question to be settled was what logistical support should be given to the groups
and the negotiations between groups. It was regrettable that such support was only
available at Geneva or New York but such limitations were inherent in the work and rules
of the United Nations.
Sir Roger JACKLING (United Kingdom) said that at that stage it was enough to
decide whether to ask that the Secretariat should be authorized to assist delegations
wishing to engage in inter-sessional consultations.
A/CONF.62/BUR/SR.12
Approved For Release 2002/06/14 : -CIA-RDP82S00697R000300120012-1
 Approved For Release 2002/06/14: CIA-RDP82SO0697ROO0300120012-1
- 11
Mr. SCHREIBER (Peru) emphasized that, as the consultations would be informal
and between persons acting in a. private capacity, there could be no question of sending
official invitations to goverments. He feared that the presence of the President of
the Conference at those consultations might tend to render them official, particularly
if he were to preside over them.
The CHAIRMAN said that he would not preside over such consultations and
certainly would not fulfil functions contrary to the Rules of Procedure.
Mr. YOLGA (Turkey) said that the Tunisian representative had clearly stated
what he himself had had in mind. His delegation agreed that the procedure outlined by
the Chairman should. be followed, namely that regional and interest groups could meet in
private between sessions and that the Secretariat should be asked to provide the requisite
logistical support. That was as far as one could go at that stage.
The CHAIRMAN said that in the absence of objection he would take it that the
General Committee decided to request the Secretariat to provide the needed facilities
to any group wishing to hold informal consultations between the sessions.
It was so decided.
The C HAIRMAN added that anyone wishing to arrange such meetings should inform
the Secretariat before Wednesday, 7 May. The Secretariat would distribute to all
delegations a note indicating the dates of scheduled meetings of the main United Nations
bodies.
The meeting rose at 11.50 a.m.
- Approved d-For Release- 2002106114 : CEA-RDP82SO0697ROOO3OO12OO12-1