Advertisement

Conclusion

  • Ramendra Nath Chowdhuri

Abstract

“The International Trusteeship System,” declared Secretary-General Trygve Lie at the time of the inauguration of the Trusteeship Council, “is no mere prolongation of the Mandates System under the League of Nations. It is a new system of international supervision. Its scope is wider, its power broader, and its potentialities far greater than those of the Mandates System.”1 Few would deny that the introduction of the Visiting Missions and oral hearings, the liberalization of the channels of the petition system, and the association of representatives of non-Administering Powers in the work of the Trusteeship Council are remarkable improvements on the preceding system. But, can we say that the powers of the new system are broader and its potentialities far greater than the old one in the light of its operation during the past nine years? Is it true to say that the Trusteeship System is more effective than the Mandates System? Is there any possibility of its extension to the remaining parts of the colonial world? Is the operation of the machinery devised by the Charter for the supervision of the Trust Territories satisfactory? If not, what improvements can be made in its working? What are the prospects of these Territories for the attainment of the goal of self-government or independence? We shall try to answer these questions and to draw some conclusions as to the effectiveness of the new system.

Keywords

Trusteeship System Voluntary Association Trusteeship Status Administer Authority Bonin Island 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    T.C., O.R., First Year, First Sess., 26 March 1947, p. 4.Google Scholar
  2. 1.
    M. Hailey, An African Survey (London: O.U.P., 1945, 2ed.) pp. 219–220.Google Scholar
  3. 2.
    D. Hall, Mandates, Dependencies and Trusteeship, p. 51.Google Scholar
  4. 3.
    Supra, p. 178; U.N. Doc. A/C. 4/SR. 244, 11 January 1952, p. 292.Google Scholar
  5. 4.
    U.N. Doc. A/C. 4/SR. 245, 12 January 1952, pp. 296-300.Google Scholar
  6. 1.
    F. D. Lugard, The Dual Mandate in British Tropical Africa (London: W. Black-wood, 1922), p. 56.Google Scholar
  7. 2.
    W. R. Crocker, Self-Government for the Colonies (London: G. Allen & Unwin, 1949), p. 18.Google Scholar
  8. 3.
    A. Zimmern, The League of Nations and the Rule of Law, 1918–1935, (London: MacMillan, 1936, p. 460.Google Scholar
  9. 4.
    The New York Times, Vol. CIV, No. 35, 424, 19 January 1955, p. 2.Google Scholar
  10. 1.
    G.A., Resol. 848 (IX), 22 November 1954, Doc. A/2890, 1955, p. 27.Google Scholar
  11. 2.
    Ibid., Resol. 850 (IX), 22 November 1954, p. 28.Google Scholar
  12. 3.
    L. A. Mander, Some Dependent Peoples of the South Pacific (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1954), p. 491.Google Scholar
  13. 4.
    The Mandates System: Origin, Principles and Application (Geneva: L.N., 1945), p. 47.Google Scholar
  14. 1.
    U.N. Doc. A/C. 4 386, 1 December 1953, p. 480.Google Scholar
  15. 2.
    Ibid., p. 483.Google Scholar
  16. 3.
    U.N. Doc. A/PV. 479, 27 September 1954, p. 77.Google Scholar
  17. 4.
    U.N. Doc. A/C. 4/SR. 439, 19 November 1954, p. 272.Google Scholar
  18. 1.
    U.N. Doc. A/C. 4/SR. 441, 24 November 1954, p. 281.Google Scholar
  19. 2.
    L. K. Munro, „Trust Territories Progress along the Road to Self-Government, U.N. Bulletin, Vol. XV, 1 August 1953, p. 81.Google Scholar
  20. 3.
    U.N. Doc. A/2680, 1954, R.T.C., pp. 96-97.Google Scholar
  21. 4.
    U.N.: Treaty Series, Vol. 8, No. 123 (1947), p. 194.Google Scholar
  22. 5.
    Trygve Lie, In the Cause of Peace: Seven Years with the U.N. (New York: Macmillan, 1954), pp. 444–445.Google Scholar
  23. 1.
    G.A., O.R., Fourth Sess., Fourth Comm., 30 September 1949, p. 3.Google Scholar
  24. 2.
    John Pinder, U.N. Reform: Proposals for Charter Amendment (London: Federal Union Bookshop, 1953), p. 9.Google Scholar
  25. 1.
    U.N. Doc. T/SR. 565, 27 January 1955, p. 11.Google Scholar
  26. 2.
    U.N. Doc. T/1056, 9 June 1953, pp. 18-19.Google Scholar
  27. 3.
    Supra, pp. 272-273.Google Scholar
  28. 1.
    John Stuart Mill, Considerations on Representative Government (London: Parker and Bourn, 1861), pp. 324–235.Google Scholar
  29. 2.
    U.N. Doc. T/1142, 23 December 1954, p. 186; supra, pp.251-252.Google Scholar
  30. 1.
    Ibid., pp. 185-186; J. S. Reid (New Zealand), Chairman of the Mission did not concur with this recommendation of the majority, supra, p. 226.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science + Business Media B.V. 1955

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ramendra Nath Chowdhuri
    • 1
  1. 1.geboren te BanarasUttar PradeshIndia

Personalised recommendations