A/34/PV.90 General Assembly

I should like to propose that the list of speakers on this item be closed this afternoon at 6 o'clock. If therc is no objection, I shall take it that the General Assembly adopts that proposal. It was so decided.

First of all I should like to express the sincere gratitude of the people and Government of the Comoros to the members of the Assembly for their active particiation in seeking a just and lasting solution to the probem that concerns us. The virtually unanimous support that they have so far given us is for us a source of legitimate satisfaction; it eloquently shows that our claims are well-founded, and that nourishes the hope of the delegation of my country that we may resolutely embark upon a decisive phase in our work. 3. Ourhope is all the stronger since the question of the Comorian island of Mayotte is for us an essential question that can be settled only by our recovering the rights of which we have been deprived—that is, by the affirmation of our full and complete sovereignty over our entire national territory. 4. The problem that we are now considering is, as we have always emphasized, a problem of decolonization, the solution of which is to be found in application of the rules and principles governing that field and recognized by all States, including France. 5. For that reason, since this question arose, we have advocated the following: first, the implementation of General Assembly resolution 1514 (XV) regarding the right of peoples to self-determination, and, secondly, respect by the former colonial Power and third States from colonial times. 6. The recognition of this principle by the Government of France is undisputed, as is clear from the statement made by the President of the Republic of France at a press conference held on 24 October 1974. He said: “Our position is that decolonization must proceed within the boundaries drawn by the former colonial Power.”’ In the case of the archipelago of the Comoros, what are those boundaries? If we refer to the position taken by the former colonial Power, in this case France, we note that, in the organization of the territory of the Comoros, the archipelago of the Comoros has always been viewed as a whole comprising the islands of Anjouan, Grande- Comore, Mayotte and Mohéli. 7. Throughout its effective administration, France held to that same geographical framework, which, indeed, was inevitable. The various statutes that it successively accorded the archipelago always took into account the physical, ethnic and cultural factors that constituted and strengthened the unity of the four islands. 8. Thus the Comoros, which initially together constituted a French protectorate, in 1912 became a French colony, placed under the authority of the General Government of Madagascar. In 1946 the four islands evolved into an administratively and financially autonomous entity, with an elected General Council. 9, In 1962, within the framework of the decolonization of the continent and the political evolution within the archipelago, the Comoros, still as a group, acceded to genuine domestic autonomy, which paved the way for the Territory’s independence within the geographical, administrative and political boundaries set by the former colonial Power. These geographical boundaries, which France strove to preserve, were not artificially created; nor were they fixed solely for reasons of administrative convenience. Their outline merely corresponded to the need to respect the integrity of a group of islands inhabited by one people professing the same aith. 10. Thus, with regard to the populations, Professor Yves Person of the Sorbonne, an eminent specialist in African history, showed that the inhabitants of the four islands that make up the archipelago belonged to a single people. In addition, there is not a single family on Mayotte— we are not speaking of populations that settled there later—whose origins cannot be traced back to the other three islands, and this has held true since the second generation. 11. From the point of view of religion, the Comoros are united as a group by the same religion, Islam. Adherence to the same religious community existed 12. Therefore we note that French colonization merely served to ratify, based on the existing state of affairs, the objective situation that had previously prevailed. Furthermore, taking these various considerations into account, this is why the French Government, through the law of 17 Octover 1974, recognized the archipelago’s orientation towards independence as a single geographical and political entity. The Secretary of State for Cverseas Departments and Territories at the time, Mr. Olivier Stirn, stated in this regard: “The French Government has opted for an archipelago-wide consultation for three reasons: first, for the legal reason that under the rules of international law a territory retains the frontiers that it had as a colony; secondly, a multiplicity of different statuses for the various islands of the archipelago is inconceivable; thirdly, it is not for France to set the Comorians against each other; on the contrary, its role is to help to bring them closer together. . .” 13, The Government and the people of the Comoros have never expressed any claims contrary to the statements contained in the declaration of the French Secretary of State. All we are asking is respect for the rights recognized as ours by the international community. 14. The question of Mayotte has arisen because France has refused to apply the zules it had previously accepted. I shall not dweli on ‘he considerations that led to the French authorities’ adoption of the law of 3 July 1975, which, providing for an isiand-by-island consultation, was to lead to a decolonization process contrary to the ideas that that country had until then upheld. Nor shall I mention the three difficult years that have ensued in the relations between Paris and Moroni. I shall simply emphasize that the Organization of African Unity [OAU] and the United Nations, as well as the non-aligned movement and the Islamic Conference, have from the outset called upon France to respect its commitments and to abide by the rules to which it has subscribed. 15. There has been no lack ofaction by these bodies to bring about a negotiated and just settlement, but throughout this period it has encountered obstacles caused mainly by the absence of diplomatic relations between France and the Comores and by the intransigent attitude each country has taken. 16. This is why ever since the institutions were established in Moroni, the Government of the Comoros, dec ply concerned over the settlement of the Comorian island of Mayotte, has resolutely engaged in seeking a new Strategy that could, with the support of the United Nations and OAU, bring about a relaxation of the existing rigid positions and open the way to a rapid and satisfactory solution. i7. Recently, during the general debate in this Assembiy, { referred to the actions being taken by the Government of the Comoros to achieve this aim [26th meeting]. I should like to recall them. 18. Sirst, on the external level, we have agreed to resume the relations with France that have been interand at a higher level between the Comorian and French delegations are also planned, the first series of which is scheduled for the present month of December. These meetings should provide an opportunity for an objective examination of the situation prevailing in Mayotte and for the settlement of this question at an early date. The Comorian side, for its part, is prepared, as always, to contribute to the success of these negotiations. 19. Onthe domestic level, in response to the wishes of *4e population and in order better to take account of each island’s special characteristics, we have decided to establish a federation among the islands of Anjouan, Grande-Comore, Mayotte and Moheéli. This federation grants broad autonomy to local authorities, namely governors and councillors, elected by the population of each island. The Constitution setting up this federation, which was overwhelmingly approved by the people in October 1978, will thus enable our brothers on Mayotte, as soon as they have rejoined the large Comorian family, to enjoy the same rights and guarantees as the inhabitants of the other islands. 20. In conclusion, I should like to recall a statement by the President of the French Republic, the terms of which faithfully reflect my Governmeni’s concerns: “‘[The Comoros] are an archipelago which constitutes a single entity. . . .The population is homogeneous, with practically no people of French origin, or only very few. . . was it reasonable to imagine that a part of the archipelago should become independent and that one island, whatever sympathy one might have for its inhabitants, should retain a different status? ‘“‘T believe that one must accept contemporary realities. The Comoros are a single unit, they have always been a single unit, and it is natural that their fate should be a common fate. . . .”

It is quite possible for any issue to be over-simplified. Therefore, in our work here at the United Nations where new and very complicated issues must constantly be tackled, oversimplification is a danger always to be guarded against. However, when a matter is simple, or can be stated ina simple manner or when a matter is not an issue, there is no need to present it otherwise. In the view of my delegation, the issue of Mayotte is a very straightforward question. 22. What is the question? The question is whether the island of Mayotte is an integral part of the Republic of the Comoros and, if it is, what steps, if any, need to be taken by the United Nations in order that the situation in the archipelago may conform to what legally it ought to De. 23. Prior to the referendum of 22 December 1974, by ral entity, with a homogeneous population. The President went on to declare: ** |. . Was it reasonable to imagine that a part of the archipelago should become independent and that one island, whatever sympathy one might have for its inhabitants, should retain a different status?’ That was the question posed by the President. He then went on to answer his own question. He said: “I believe that one must accept contemporary realities. The Comoros are a single unit, they have always been a single unit, and it is natural that their fate should be a common fate. . . .” 24, In spite of so clear and correct a stand by the French President, nevertheless on 3 July 1975 the French Parliament adopted a bill which, instead of purely and simply ratifying the clearly expressed wish of the Comorian people to accede to independence, subjected the granting of independence to several preconditions. At this juncture, however, the Comorian leaders, as was their right if not also their duty, proclaimed the independence of the Republic of the Comoros on 6 July 1975. A fortnight thereafter France arbitrarily and without any legal right pro:esded to conduct a secor:d referendum on the island of Mayotte, an island that had been, was then and still is part and parcel of the Comoros. Such an act by France runs contrary to the principles of the United Nations Charter, in particular those parts of it that protect the territorial integrity of States and proscribe interference in their domestic affairs. The action by France, moreover, violates. United Nations resolutions regarding decolonization. 25. The Government of the Comoros continues to press its legitimate claim and its legal entitlement to the island of Mayotte, and that claim has been endorsed and supported by OAU, the movement of non-aligned countries, the Islamic Conference and the League of Arab States. 26. Itis our delegation’s understanding that the President of the Federal Islamic Republic of the Comoros and the President of the French Republic have had talks during which they have agreed in principle to reconsider the question of the Comorian island of Mayotte. Speaking, therefore, this afternoon as the representative of Liberia and as the current Chairman of OAU, I wish to urge both France and the Comoros to speed up their efforts aimed at an early resolution of this problem. I make this plea because the resolution on the Comorian island of Mayotte that was passed by the Council of Ministers of OAU at its thirty-third ordinary session, heli at Monrovia from 6 to 20 July last, reaffirmed OAU’s solidarity with the people of the Comoros in its determination to defend its political unity, national sovereignty and territorial integrity [see A/34/ 552, annex I, CM/Res. 730 (XXXIID)}. 28. Our attitude is based on the application of the principle of self-determination which, as we see it, is the main criterion for the determination of the destiny of peoples, as well as the political and geographical framework of their existence. The Charter of the United Nations itself states as one of the foundations of international relations the right of peoples to selfdetermination; it refers expressly to the need to take account of ‘“‘the freely expressed wishes of the peoples’’. 29. The inhabitants of the island of Mayotte, by an overwhelming majority during the referendums of December i974 and February 1976, expressed their will to remaii a part of the French Republic. They did this in full freedom, without the governmental authorities having sought to influence them one way or the other. 30. France had stated in advance that it would bow to the results of the vote, whatever the outcome. How could it have subsequently rejected a community which requested to remain part of France? How could it have forced that community to choose any path other than that which they had deliberately chosen? Such an attitude would be unjustifiable from the point of view of general principles and, at any rate, would have been contrary to the constitutional rules which govern our country. 31. Ido not think it necessary for me to rehearse the recent past, but a few points should be recalled, because essentially they motivated the position taken by the French delegation at the beginning of this session” when considering the request for the question of Mayotte to be included on the agenda of the General Assembly. We were against that item being discussed. We explained this, referring to the provisions of Article 2 of the United Nations Charter, which states that the United Nations is not authorized to intervene in the internal affairs of States. Havirg recalled this fundamental objection, therefore, we are now speaking in a debate which we believe should never have taken place, and we are doing this because we are anxious to serve the truth as far as the General Assembly is concerned and thus to contribute to the calm of this discussien. 32. Any investigation into eventual intentions, if one were tempted to carry one out, would be not only unjust but erroneous: it has already been stated that the choice made by the Mahorais is not irrevocable in nature. The present status of Mayotte is quite capable of evolving. The law which created it has laid down a legal framework which can easily be revised and adapted to the characteristics of the island. 33. The final choice will depend solely on the democratically expressed opinion of the Mahorais themselves. France is in no wise opposed, we repeat, to 34, France is determined to continue on this course. AS was announced in the communiqué published in Paris at the conclusion of the meeting of the Council of Ministers on 24 Octoiser last, the French Government decided ‘to suggest to the Comorian Government talks at a ministerial level which would go into the problems existing between France and the Comoros that have not yet been resolved, and to study ways and means of strengthening economic and human relations between the territorial community of Mayotte and the other islands of the archipelago.”’ 35. The Comoros Government stated that it agreed to those talks being held. They are at present being arranged and they wili shortly take place. We have no doubt, for our part, that the two parties will approach them in a spirit of mutual co-cperation which will help further progress in the relations between our two countries. 36. That is what my delegation wished to say. We have described the situation as it exists and we have shown the prospects which are open, provided that the required conditions are met.

This is not the first time that the item under consideration has been included on the agenda of this body. The question has been debated before, beginning with the debate three years ago in the General Assembly,? when resolution 31/4 was adopted reaffirming the necessity of safeguarding the unity, territorial integrity and sovereignty of the Republic of the Comoros. At the thirty-second session, the question was debated again by the General Assembly* because the French Government had not acted on the resolution of the previous session. Consequently, the General Assembly adopted resolution 32/ 7, in which, inier alia, it requested the French and the Comorian Governments to negotiate an agreement which wouid settle the question, in keeping with the relevant resolutions of the General Assembly and in respect for the political unity and territorial integrity of the Comores. 38. Furthermore, the question has also been considered by the CAU, by the countries in the non-aligned movement and by the Islamic Conference, as well as by 3 Ibid., Thirty-first Session, Plenary Meetings, 33rd to 39th meetings. 39. Now at the current session, this item has been once again included on the agenda for our consideration. At the same time, the French Government has either chosen to ignore or refused to implement or to act on the resolutions on Mayotte adopted by this body. It is precisely for this reason that this item has once again come before us, and if this is any indication, pres:mably it will continue to appear on the agenda, for the reasons stated, until such time as the French Government and the Republic of the Comoros have resolved the question in a mutually acceptable manner and in accordance with the resolutions of the United Nations. 40. My Government regrets that this item has once again appeared and that there has been no settlement and no satisfactory explaaation from the French Government as to why it has consistently chosen not to heed the genuine and legitimate concern of the Government of the Comoros and to ignore the resolutions of the General Assembly on this matter. 41. On the other hand, this is not the first time that the French Government has acted in this way, for its past history as a colonial Power contains examples of it adopting the same position in resp2ct to some of its fortner colonies that are now independent sovereign nations. Indeed, it still adopts that position with regard to its remaining colonies, as in this case, as well as to its remaining territories elsewhere, the argument advanced by the French Government being that they are an integral part of France. 42. Itis clear, however, that even when this argument was applied in the past to former colonies, the French Government in the end was very constructive in its approach to the question of decolonization where it involved colonies considered to be integral parts of France, the Republic of the Comeros being a caée in point. Indeed, not only was this done, but it was done despite the fact that since 1947 it had unilaterally decided to withdraw some of its Territories, including the Comoros in 1957, from the list of Territories on which by virtue of Article 73 e of the United Nations Charter it was required and obliged to transmit information. 43. My delegation believes that the .‘rench Government and the Government of the Comoros can now, in the same spirit of co-operation and understanding in. which they agreed that the Comoros should be an independent sovereign nation, proceed to complete that agreement by returning Mayotte to the Comoros, as was always envisaged in the original agreement. 44, Until Mayotte was detached from the Comoros just before they became an independent nation, it had always been geographically, historically and culturally part of the Comoros. The people of Mayoiie have religious and linguistic affinities with the people of the Comoros. Indeed, except for the fact that Mayotte is still under French control, the people of Mayotte and the Comoros have always been one and the same people. Until it was detached in 1975—and only until then—it had aiways been the French Government’s position that Mayotte was an integral part of the Comoros. Its detachment without any proper consideration for the rance. 46. The question of decolonization has always been of special concern to us in the South Pacific region. The right to self-determination and independence is one to which countries such as my own are strongly committed. In this particular case, it is obvious that the process of decolonization has been left incomplete for reasons that only the French Government would be in a pos**ion to explain. 47. It is my delegation’s hope, therefore, that the French Government will see its way clear to initiating discussions with the Government of the Comoros with a view to arriving at a mutually acceptable agreement to return Mayotte to the Republic of the Comoros.

We shall conclude the debate on this item tomorrow afternoon, and I wish to urge those delegations wishing to speak on this particular item to inscribe their names on the list today. AGENwA ITEM 25 The situation in the Middle East: report of the Secretary-Generz! (continusd)*

I wish to draw the attention of the Assembly to draft resolution A/34/L.53 on the situation in the Middle East, the debate on which was concluded yesterday afternoon. The Assembly will continue consideration 01 this item tomorrow and, in the afternoon, will take a decision on the draft resolution.

I propose now to suspend the meeting while the ballot papers are being counted. The meeting was suspended at 4.05 p.m. and resumed at 4.10 p.m.

The result of the voting is as follows: Number of ballot papers: 142 Invaiid ballots: 0 Number of valid Eailots: 142 Absientions: 1 Number of members voting: 141 Required majority: 94 Number of votes obtained: Cuba 2.0... c ee eee eee ees 80 Colombia ........ 0... cece ccc e eee eee ees 61

Since the second in this series of unrestricted ballots has proved inconclusive, we shall mow proceed to the third unrestricted ballot. As before, in this unrestricted ballot any member State from the group of Latin American States may be a candidate for election, with the exception of Bolivia and Jamaica. The ballot papers will now be distributed. At the invitation of the President, Mr. Mardovich (Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic) and Mr. Celikkol (Turkey) acted as tellers. A vote was taken by secret ballot.

I propose now to suspend the meeting while the ballots are being counted. The meeting was suspended at 4.20 p.m. and resumed at 4.30 p.m. Number of votes obtained: OT a 79 Colombia ............. cece cece eeneees 65

Since the third unrestricted ballot has proved inconclusive, in accordance with rule 94 of the rules of procedure, the General Assembly will now proceed to the first of three restricted ballots. This ballot is restricted to Cuba and Colombia. Any ballot papers containing the name of any other country will be declared invalid. The ballot papers will now be distributed. At the invitation of the President, Mr. Mardovich (Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic) and Mr. Celikkal (Turkey) acted as tellers. A vote was taken by secret ballot.

I propose now to suspend the meeting while the ballots are being counted. The i;:eeting was suspended at 4.35 p.m, and resumed at 4.40 p.m.

The result of the voting is as follows: Number of ballot papers: 147 Invalid ballots: 0 Number of valid ballots: 147 Abstentions: 2 Number of members voting: 145 Required majority: 97 Number of votes obtained: 51 0: 82 Colombia ...........000ecceeeeeeeeees 63

As neither of the countries obtained the required two-thirds majority, the General Assembly will continue the voting and will hold a second restricted ballot. As in the last ballot, the only countries whose names may be included in the ballot papers are Cuba and Colombia. Any papers containing the names of other countries will be declared invalid. The ballot papers will now be distributed. At the invitation of the President, Mr. Mardovich (Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic) and Mr. Celikkol (Turkey) acted as tellers. A vote was taken by secret ballot.

I propose now to suspend the meeting while the ballots are being counted. The meeting was suspended at 4.50 p.m. and resumed at 4.55 p.m. umber of votes obtained: Cuba ..... ee eee e teen eee eees 80 Colombia .............0. cece cee eecees 63

It may be of some interest to delegations to know that in taking the next ballot they will have set a new record in the annals of the United Nations. The largest number of ballots ever taken until now was 51 in 1959. In proceeding to the 52nd ballot, the Assembiy now advances to an unprecedented number. Naturally, as President of the Assembly it is my hope that we shall not surpass that record by too great a number. 66. As neither of the countries obtained the required two-thirds majority, the General Assembly will continue the voting and will hold a third restricted ballot. As in the last ballot, the only countries whose names may be included in the ballot papers ae Cuba and Colombia. Any papers containing the names of other countries will be declared invalid. The ballot papers will now be distributed. At the invitation of the President, Mr. Mardovich (Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic) and Mr. Celikkol (Turkey) acted as tellers. to A vate was taken by secret ballet.

I propose now to suspend the meeting while the ballots are being counted. The meeting was suspended at 5 p.m. and resumed at 5.15 p.m.

The result of the voting is as follows: Number of ballot papers: 146 Invalid ballots: 0 Number of valid ballots: 146 Abstentions: 1 Number of members voting: 145 Required majority: 97 Number of votes obtained: Cuba 2... cece ccc eee neee 82 Colombia ............ cece ceeeacencees 63

As the third restricted ballot has proved inconclusive, we shall new proceed to hold a series of unrestricted ballots. In this context any member State from the group of Latin American States may be a candidate for election except, of course, Bolivia and Jamaica. The ballot papers will now be distributed. A vote was taken by secret ballot.

I propose now to suspend the meeting while the ballot papers are being couxited. The meeting was suspended at 5.20 p.m. and resumed at 5.30 p.m.

The result of the voting is as follows: Number of ballot papers: 146 Invalid ballots: 0 Number of valid ballots: 146 Abstentions: 2 Number of members voting: 144 Required majority: 96 Number of votes obtained: Cuba ooo c cece cee enecenccereeeeceeeees 82 Colombia ....... 0. cc cececeaeeeccceces 60 MEXICO .. 2. . eee e eens eens bi tesceceees 1 Saint Lucia ..... cece sec eee ee eee e nena I

Since this first unrestricted ballot has proved inconclusive, we shall proceed to the second unrestricted ballot on the same terms and conditions. Therefore, any member State from the group of Latin American States may be a candidate for election except, of course, Bolivia and Jamaica. The ballot papers will now be distributed. At the invitation of the President, Mr. Mardovich (Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic) and Mr. Celikkol (Turkey) acted as tellers. A vote was taken by secret ballot.

I propose now to suspend the meeting while the ballots are being counted. The meeting was suspended at 5.35 p.m. and resumed at 5.45 p.m.

The result of the voting is as follows: Number of ballot papers: 147 Invalid ballots: 0 Number of valid ballots: 147 Abstentions: 2 Number of members voting: 145 Required majority: 97 Number of votes obtained: Cuba ... 0... cece ee cece ere e en eee 80 Colombia ...........0-cc cere cece eeeee 62 Brazil ......... cece eee eect er eee eneee 1 MEXICO ......... cece cence cence eeeeees 1 Nicaragua. ........ceccceeee erence nee 1

Since the second unrestricted ballot has proved inconclusive, we shall now proceed At the invitation of the President, Mr. Mardovich (Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic) and Mr. Celikkol (Turkey) acted as tellers. A vote was taken by secret ballot.

I propose now to suspend the meeting while the ballots are being counted. The meeting was suspended at 5.55 p.m. and resumed at 6.05 p.m.

The result of the voting is as follows: Number of ballot papers: 147 Invalid ballots: 0 Number of valid ballots: 147 Abstentions: 2 Number of members voting: 145 Required majority: 97 Number of votes obtained: Cuba .... cece eee cence eer eee eee eens 84 Colombia ....... 0c. e cece eee eeeeecees . 59 Brazil ......... eee ede e nee eeeenenees 1 El Salvador .........ccceeeeceeeeneeee 1

Since the third unrestricted ballot has proved inconclusive, the Assembly will now proceed to the first of a series of three restricted ballots in accordance with rule 94 of the rules of procedure. This balloting is restricted to the two candidates which have obtained the largest number of votes, namely Cuba and Colombia. The ballot papers will now be distributed. At the invitation of the President, Mr. Mardovich (Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic) and Mr. Celikkol (Turkey) acted as tellers. A vote was taken by secret ballot.

I propose now to suspend the meeting while the ballots are being counted. The meeting was suspended at 6.10 p.m. and resumed at 6.20 p.m.

The resuit of the voting is as foilows: Number of ballot papers: 147 Invalid ballots: 0 Number of valid ballots: 147 Abstentions: 1 Number of members voting: 146 Required majority: 98 Number of votes obtained: 500 5: 84 Colombia ............ ccc cece cece eens 62 At the invitation of the President, Mr. Mardovich (Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic) and Mr. Celikkol (Turkey) acted as tellers. A vote was taken by secret ballot. _ 82. The PRESIDENT: I propose now to suspend the meeting while the ballots are being counted. The meeting was suspended at 6.25 p.m. and resumed at 6.30 p.m.

The result of the voting is as follows: Number of ballot papers: 145 Invalid ballots: 0 Number of valid ballots: 145 Abstentions: 2 Number of members voting: 143 Required majority: 6 Number of votes obtained: OT 6: ap 81- Colombia ......... cece cece eee ee eeene 62

As that second restricted ballot has proved inconclusive, we shall now proceed to the third ballot, which will be restricted to Cuba and Colombia. The ballot papers will now be distributed. At the invitation of the President, Mr. Mardovich (Byelorussian Soviet Socialist Republic) and Mr. Celikkol (Turkey) acted as tellers. A vote was taken by secret ballot.

I propose now to suspend the meeting while the ballots are being counted. The meeting was suspended at 6.40 p.m. and resumed at 6.50 p.m.

The result of the voting is as follows: Number of ballot papers: 147 Invalid ballots: 0 Number of valid bailots: 147 Abstentions: 1 Number of members voting: 146 Required majority: 98 Number of votes obtained: Cuba . 2... ccc ccc cece cece eee eenes 84 Colombia ..............cce ec eeeeeeees 62

In view of the inconclusive nature of our voting, I should like now to advise the Assembly of my intention with regard to the future consideration of this item. Despite the fact that we have 88. May I again remind you that rule 142 of our rules of procedure specifies: ‘‘The General Assembly shall each year, in the course of its regular session, elect five nonpermanent members of the Security Council for a term of two years.” 89. Furthermore, in implementation of this provision, rule 94 of the rules of procedure specifies that when the balloting is inconclusive after a series of unrestricted and restricted ballots, the procedure shall be repeated ‘‘until all the places have been filled’’. 90. Iam determined that this session shall discharge this important obligation. As members know, however, we have less than two weeks left. Moreover, the Assembly has an extremely full programme for that period. The only option left to me is to schedule further alloting whenever possible, even though this could involve resorting to extended all-night sessions, ‘91. The next occasion on which we could return to the balloting is Wednesday, 12 December. It is therefore my intention on that morning to begin consideration of agenda item 18, ‘‘Implementation of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples”’, and as soon as we have exhausted the list of speakers for the morning we shall resume the election of one non-permanent member of the Security Council. During the afternoon of the same day, that is, of 12 December, we shall resume the debate on decolonization and, if further balloting is still required, we shall then resume the voting process after the speaker’s list for that afternoon is exhausted, proceeding into the evening hours if necessary. a 92. I wish to urge delegations to make every possible effort, during the intervening period, to ensure that the Assembly will be in a position to conclude its work on this item and thus discharge its responsibilities. Organization of work

I should now like to bring to the attention of the Assembly a matter which affects a previous decision of the General Assembly and is of great importance to the work of the Second Committee, the Advisory Committee on Administrative and Budgetary Questions ard the Fifth Committee, during the concluding weeks of the session. 94, It now appears that despite all efforts of the Second Committee to conclude its work on Friday, 7 December—the target date set by the Assembly—the Second Committee will not be able to do so. There are also draft resolutions with financial implications that are still being negotiated among the regional groups. 95. After extensive discussion on that matter, and in consultation with the Chairmen of the Committees involved, I have agreed to propose that the General Assembly approve that the deadline for submission of draft resolutions with financial implications from the It was so decided. The meeting rose at 6.55 p.m.