A/37/PV.4 General Assembly

We .shall examine first sec- tion 11 of the first report of the General Committee [A/37/250], which deals with the organization of the session. 2. Members are aware that by its decision 34/401, which has been reproduced as annex VI of the roles ofprocedure, the General Assembly adopted a number of provisions aimed at rationalizing its procedures and organization. Many ofthese provisions had already been imp!emented at the thirty-fourth, thirty-fifth and thirty-sixth sessions, but some have not yet been or have been only partially implemented. It is hoped that at the thirty-seventh session the Assembly will endeavour to advance this process of rationalization. 3. The provisions of General Assembly decision 34/401, to which I have just referred, that directly affect the organization of the work of the General Committee are reproduced in paragraph 2 ofllocument A/37/250. May I consider that the General Assembly takes note of the action taken by the General Com- mittee on that paragraph? It was so decided. 4. The PRESIDENT: Regarding the schedule of meetings referred to in paragraph 3, the Generai Committee draws the General Assembly's attention to paragraph 3 ofits decision 34/401. In this connection I should like to remind the Assembly that ,,'llIes 67 and 108 of the rules of procedure provide that the President of the General Assembly may declare a meeting open and permit the debate to proceed when at least one third of the members are present, and the Chairman ofa Main Committee may declare a meeting open and permit the debate to proceed when at least one quarter of the members are present. 5. I should like to assure the Assembly that, as I have already indicated in the General Committee, I shall be in the Chair punctually at the scheduled time and I urge the Chairmen of the Main Committees to do the same. It is essential that at least one member of each delegation be present at the scheduled time in order to avoid the problem ofa quorum. I sincerely hope that all delegations will make a special effort to co-operate in this regard. Friday, 24 September 1982, at 10.55 a.m. NEW YORK 6. We turn now to paragraph 4 of. the report, con- cerning the general debate. May I consider that the General Assembly approves the recommendations in paragraph 4 (a) and (b)? It was so decided. 7. The PRESIDENT: Regarding the explanations of vote referred to in paragraph 5 of the report, the General Committee draws the Assembly's attention to paragraph 7 of its decision 34/401. Paragraph 6 deals with the closing date of thesessinD and para- graph 7 with the records of the Main ·Committees. I take it that those recommendations are approved by the General Assembly. It was so decided. 8. The PRESIDENT: In paragraph 8 the General Committee draws the Assembly's attention .to para- graphs 18 and 19 of its decision 34/401 concerning the election of the Chairmen of the MIPJn Committees. I ex?ress the hope that these provisions will be fully implemented 10 facilitate the organization ofwork of future sessions of the General Assembly. 9. The General Committee also draws.the J\$~m-. bly's attention to paragraph 17. of its decision 34/4Q1, which is reproduced in paragraph 9 of the .report, concerning concluding statements in the General Assembly and its Main Committees. 10. Paragraph 10 refers to budgetary and financial questions under role 153 of the roles of procedure. In this connection, the General Committee draws the Assembly's attention to paragraphs 12 and 13 of its decision 34/401. As members are aware, this has been a serious problem, especially towards the enll of the session; this year Friday, 10 December, is the target date for the conclusion of the work of the Main Com- mittees, except for the Fifth Commit'-ee. 11. Paragraphs 11" and 12 of the report refer .to, documentation. In paragraph 11 the General Com- mitte~draws the Assembly's attention to paragraph 28 of its decision 34/401. 12. Regarding paragraph 12, may I consider that the General Assembly approves the recommendation of the General Committee regarding the need fot maximum restraint in requests by Member States and subsidiary organs for circulation of material as official documents of the General Assembly? It was so decided.

We turn now to paragraph 13 of the report. The General Committee draws the Assembly's attention to paragraph 32 of its decision 34/40~ concerning resolutions. 14. I trust that the Assembly will take duly into account the provisions of decision 34/401 which the (b) Committee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of the Palestinian People; (c) Preparatory Committee for the International Conference on the Question of Palestine; (d) Special Committee against Apartheid; (e) Special Committee on the Situation with regard to the Implementation of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples; (f) United Nations Council for Namibia. 17. May I consider that it is the wish of the General Assembly to approve that recommendation? Tt was so decided (see decision 37/403). 18. The PRESIDENT: We turn now to section III of the report, relat~ng to the adoption of the agenda. 19. May I remind members of rule 23 of the rules of procedure, which provides that: . "Debate on the inclusion ofan item in the agenda, when that item has been recommended for inclusion by the General Committee, shall be limited to three speakers in favour of, and three against, the inclusion." I should like to stress that at this time we are not discussing the substance ofany item. I should also like to remind delegations that statements will have to be made from their seats, in keeping with paragraph 11 of annex VI to the rules of procedure. 20. In paragraphs 17 to 20 of the report the General Committee gives an account of the action it has taken reg~rding .items 54, 135, 136 ~nd 137 of the draft agenda. That action is duly reflected in paragraph 22 of the report. 21. Mr. ROA KOURi (Cuba) (interpretation from Spanish): In accordance with rule 23 of the rul~s of procedure of the General Assembly, my delegation proposes that we vote against paragraph 20 on agenda i~em 137 and that therefore the agenda for this session should include as a separate item the question of Puerto Rico. 22. For 10 years, since 1972, the cQlonial case of Puerto Rico has been the subject of analysis by the Special Committee on the Situation with regard to the 'Implementation of the Declaration on the Granting 24. The historical background of the case of Puerto Rico since the signing of the Paris Treaty of 1898 is well known. There is abundant information in the records of the Special Committee, which has been considering the case since 1967. 25. The Government ofthe United States ofAmerica, in objecting year after year to the consideration of the case of Puerto Rico by the Special Committee and by any other United Nations body, argues that such consideration would violate paragraph 7 of Arti- cle 2 of the Charter, since the people of Puerto Rico in 1952 freely agreed to its present association with the United States, by the establishment of the 80- called Free Associated State. 26. The fact is that, in the light of resolution 1514 (XV), for a Non·Self-Governing Territory to be able freely to exercise its right to self-determination a prerequisite is that the administering Power transfer all powers to the people of the Territory. That not only was not done in 1952, but has never been done, and it is precisely one of the demands of the Special Committee. 27. Furthermore, as can easily be corroborated, Public Law 600 of the United States in no way altered the powers of sovereignty acquired when the Paris Treaty was signed and still maintained by the United States Congress over Puerto Rico. Neither, of course, did it alter the powers retained by that Congress when it adopted the Foraker law in 1900 and the Jones law in 1917. 28. The General Assembly's adoption of its reso- lution 748 (VIII) of 1953, which the United States Government brandishes today to prevent discussion of the colonial status of Puerto Rico, was the result of a mechanical majority which that Government then enjoyed in the General Assembly with the support of the eight colonial Powers and of recognized Latin American tyrannies of that time. 29. Anyone who casts even a cursory glance at the records of the debates held then in the Committee on Information from Non-Self-Governing Territories and the Fourth Committee will note the irregularities committed by the representatives ofthe United States, who were protected by that spurious majority. First, there was no analysis of the status of Pueho Rico in the light of factors contained in the report of the 38. It is relevant to point out that, during the last 30 years, the pc!itical and ideological forces have undergone fundamental changes. The parties which advocate separation have lost electoral support, from 19 per cent in 1952 to less than 6 per cent in 1980, and the party which supports the status of a free associated State has declined from 65 per cent to 47 per cent. Nevertheless it is only-and I emphasize, only-the parties which defend the right of Puerto Rico to statehood which have progressively gained in every electoral battle: from 13 per cent in 1952 to 47.2 per cent in 1980. In the latest elections, the Independentist Party won so little electoral support that it was not able to elect a single legislator or a single mayor. 39. The Puerto Rican people are firm believers in the democratic process. We hold elections every four years and more than 80 per cent of the electorate casts its vote. The result is thus truly reprtsentative of the will of the people. It is precisely that people which recognizes that the United States maintains a clear policy of self-determination and that it will accept, defend and apply any Puerto Rican decision on the question of its status. 40. The last four United States Administrations, the Presidency and the Congress, have reaffirmed their commitment to respect and defend the right of the Puerto Rican people to determine its political future by means of a peaceful, open and democratic process. Recently, President Reagan said that although he was in favour of statehood for Puerto Rico if that were to be the choice of the Puerto Ricans, his Administration would accept the decision of the majority of the people of Puerto Rico. I recognize that the Congress and the Presidency of the United States defend the right ofour people to decide what is to be our political relationship with the United States. 41. Our political evolution continues. In the future there will be a new consultation with the people to amend our Constitution or to change our political relationship with the Uoited States, but it should be quite clear that the decision is onrs, ours alone. b~r 1982. It was also stated by Carlos Romero Barcel6, the present Governor of Puerto Rico, in 1978 in his t4~stimony at the 1125th meeting of the Speciul Committee on the Situation with regard to the Imple~ mentation of the Declaration on the Granting of 'ln~e~ pendence to Colonial Countries and Peoples. l:)iUlth are true leaders, elected leaders, and authentic repre~ sentatives of the majority party in Puerto Rico. 44. I, with the strength conferred upon me by the elec;torai support of the people, maintain ~hat it is we, the Puerto Ricans, who have the right and the historic msponsibiJity to decide om' system of government and our pol.itical. relationship with the United States. Intemationa! intervention and intetfe:ence affect that right and introduce a factor which is alien to our historic process in Puerto Rico. 45. Puerto Rico is not an international problem and does not wish to be one. 'Ne have the ability, the democratic experkmce and the legal and legislative IT.lec:hanisms for consulting our people. The interna- tkmal community has in the past recognized those facts and should recognize them at present. 46. Puerto Rico adopted its own ConstituHon at the beginning of the 1950s. It was endorsed by the General Assembly in resolution 748 (VIII) of 195'3, which confirmed that Puerto Rico had exercised the' right to self~determinationby a d~mocratic'proceJs and that the resolutions on Non~Self·Governing Territories were not applicable to Puerto Rico. The same resolu- tior. maintains that any change in the relationship between Puerto Rico and the United States should take into account the will of the people of Puerto Rico and of the United States. 47. In 1959 the General Assembly adopted resolu- tion 1469 (XIV). which recognized that Alaska and Hawaii had achieved self-government on being admitted as states of the Union and gave real de jure and de facto validity to their political integration as an accep~able ftmml for the international community. 48. In the same historical process, the Generai As- sembly adopted resolution 1541 (XV) of 1960, which lists and defines 'Lnat a Territory has achieved complete self-government when, either, it becomes an inde- pendent State, establishes an association or; is integrated ;,.ltO an independent State. 49. I de~m it ailP~opriate to have referred to these Get1eral Assembh' resolutions because'they all have a bearing on r"H~rto Rico, since they establish the alternatives available to ti~e Puerto Rican pelJple' r Nevertheless, in recent years there have been· continuous efforls (0 make the General hsser.rtbly' revoke those resolutions, interfere with the right of the people of Puerto nico to genuine self-determination, and limit our opt~ons to resolve our political status. 50. There can be no selection without alternatives: the issue cannn, be determined without options; !be right to choose a political form cannot be exercised if there are no choices; there can be no talk of self- 51. We, the Puerto Rican people, have the consti- tutional right under our current political relationship with the United States, supported in its own Constitu- tion, to change or amend our Constitution in accord- ance with our own needs, political convictions or ideologies. The United Notions, in principle VII of Assembly resolution 1541 (XV), defends that right. To refuse us that right would be tantamount to intetfering in our destiny and against our Constitution. 52. It is in the light of this legal and historical analysis that thE. international community should adopt an objective position with regard to Puerto Rico. As I have indicated, Puerto Rico has (:;volved in the political arena during recent decades and we are proud ofour economic, technological and industrial develop- ment. The gross national product now exceeds $12 biJIior., per capita income is more than $4,000 and fa.mily Income is more than $11,000 per household. Undoubtedly the recession and world economic problems affect us, but we look forward to the future with faith in our capacity to sustain and continue the progress to which Puerto Rico aspires. 53. We are a people devoted to our culture, history, language and traditions. We are active defenders ofthe promotion of our arts and culture. We are dedicating resources and efforts to guaranteeing a good education for our children. Today more than 900,000 Puerto Ricans are studying at various educational levels, which means more than one out of every f('l~r Puerto Ricans. We support diverse facilities for theatre, "music and other forms of art. The Latin American peoples and all those of Hispanic descent can be assured that our politicallelationship with the United States in no way changes our cultural feelings and identification. Our political status will continue to be a matter of primary importance on the agenda of Puerto Rico i~ the present and for the future. 54. The process for bringing about a change will be one that proves our advanced political development and ensures the continuance ofourdemocratic process. 55. We respectfully r~quest the General Assembly to join us in supporting and defending the decision of the General Committee to reject the inclusion of the question ofPuerto Rico in the agenda ofthe Assembly. Our democratic system does not need the intervention ofthe international community. We, the Puerto Ricans, and we alone, will decide how and when our political status should be altered. It is our responsibility. It is our right. It is our destiny.

I shall now call on delega- tions that.wish to explain their vote before the voting. I remind representatives that explanations of vote should be restricted to 10 minutes and I hope they will co-operate with me in this respect.

The delegation ofChile supports the recommenda- tkm of the General Committee. In our opinion we should not include in the agenda of the present session the item on the question of Puerto Rico, for the following reasons. 63. Finally, the delegation of Chile believes that the people of Puerto Rico will itself, as so eloquently stated by the Mayor of San Juan, Mr. Hernan Padilla, a few minutes ago, without the aid' of extraneous political forces, be able to determine its institutional future, maintaining its Latin American identity and feelings. To that brother people we extend on'ce again our friendship in the certainty that the Puerto Ricans do not wish their internal matters to become a permanent problem involving international con- frontation, to the obvious detriment of their true interests. 64. Mr. ALBORNOZ (Ecuador) (intErpretation from Spanish): Only a year ago when this question was discussed, a statement was made by the President of the Assembry [79th meeting, para. 9] on his under- standing of the consensus of the Assembly,' which it accepted and which constitutes a very recent precedent. Our delegation, without prejudice to the traditional position of Ecuador being in favour of the inclusion of any item without prejudging the substance 74. Seventhly, the present status of Puerto Rico can in fact be revealed and changed at any time on an initiative of the Congress ofPuerto Rico by organizing another referendum. The executive and legislative branches of the Government of the United States have declared on various occasions that that country will accept any solution which Puerto Rico might adopt. And the possibility of a change in tbe present political status is expressly recognized in paragraph 9 of resolution 748 (VIII). 75. Consequently, it is fitting to conclude that, as stated in resolution 748 (VIII), the people of Puerto Rico have already exercised their right to self- determination. It is also fitting to conclude that there is no. legal or political impediment to the people of Puerto Rico promoting a change in their current status, including a ch&.nge in the statils ofindependence if they so wish. We know of no initiative to this respect having been set in motion. It is also fitting to conclude, finally, tbat the people of Puerto Rico have the power to ~xercise that right in accordance with paragraph 9 of resolution 748 (VIII). 76. In the light of those facts, my delegation con- siders that this item should not be included in the agenda of the Assembly. We shall accordingly vote in favour of the report of the Committee. 77. It is clear from what has been said, though deserving ofemphasis, that Uruguay in no way objects tn the independence of Puerto Rico or to ~lny other solution which that fi1eople might choose. The pos~tion my country wishes to restate is that it is for tbe people f of Puerto Rico alone to decide. I.. (he exercise of that . risht, it will be for the peopie alone to evaluate the consequences of various possible political solutions in their cultural and material heritage. 78. The PRESIDENT: With due respect, may I r~rnjnd representatives ~bat we are discussing procedural matters-that is, whether or not this item should be included in the agenda. I would ask repre- ind~,endeace.-,W.e fully':understand and sympathize the Geneml Assembly, the Assembly decided by a with that position of the non-aligned countries. The convincing majority that Puerto Rico should not be Soviet Union has consistently favoured the speedy included as an item in the agenda of the Assembly. elimination once and for all of the vestiges of the A similar decision was reached in 1978, when an colonial system and the full implementation of the attempt was again made to inject the question of ~darationon.decolonization. Puerto Rico into the FOlurth Committee. Earlier this week, the General Committee voted by 11 to 7 to 101. 'The Soviet delegation therefore favours tbe disavow this latest attempt to include the item. inclusion of the question of Puerto Rico in the agenda ' of the current session of the General Assembly and 10ft My delegation sees nothing in developments in win vote against the decision take~ in the General recent years which could lead us to change the view Committee contained in.paragraph 20 of its report. Aus~ralia reached in 1953, in 1971 and in 1978. We would therefore urge the Assembly again to reject the 102. Mr. TAYLOR(Grenada):.I would in the first attemptto include the item in its agendR. and to support instance like to congratulate YOU j Sir, on your election the recommendation of the Genera~ Committee. to the presidency of the thirty-seventh session of the General Assembly. I am certain that when the Foreign 109. Mr. SUJA (Czechos!ovakia): The Czechoslovah w~,uld like to take this opportunity to express our feeHngs of profound satisfaction in connection with your election to your most responsible and demanding office. 110. The proposal not to include the question of Puerto Rico in the agenda of the current session of the Assembly that was pushed through in the General Committee is based on positions that reject the responsibility of the Organization for the fate of all colonial Territories and peoples and on positions that deliberately ignore the status of Puerto Rico and thus stand directly in the way of eliminating the remnants of colonialism. They are positions that do not respect the recommenda~ions of the body competent above all others, the Special Committee: on decolonization, and the highly qualified findings and conclusions reached in that Committee. 111. My count,,, has always been and continues to be an advocate of speedy, complete and consistent decolonization. It fully supports an all-around and uncompromising implementation of the Declaration on the Granting of Ind~pendenceto Colonial Countries and Peoples. That is why the continuing efforts to maintain the current status ofPuerto Rico are a subject of concern to us. We are convinc~d that the con- sideration of the question of Puerto Rico in the Organization would decisively contribute to the search for and the finding of ways to implement the right ofthe people ofPuerto Rico to self-determination and independence. That is why Czechoslovakia has actively advocated the con~ideration of the question of Puerto Rico by the United Nations and has main- tained this position in its capacity as Vice-Chairman of the Special Committee as wen. 112. For these reasons, we also now support the proposal to include this question in the agenda of the thirty-seventh session ofthe General Assembly and, on this issue, we shall vote against the recommendation of the General Committee. 113. Mr. TSVETKOV (Bulgaria)(interpretationfrom French): The Minister for Foreign Affairs .cf my country will have an opportunity to extend to you, Sir, the' congratulations and good wishes of the Bulgarian delegation on your election as President of the thirty-seventh session of the General Assembly. Nevertheless, since this is the first time that I have spoken at this session, I take great pleasure in con- gratulating you most sincerely on your accession to tibat responsible post, all the more so since you are a representative and eminent diplomat of the Hungarian People's Republic, with which my country has the closest relations. 114. For many years now the Special Committee on decolonization has taken up this question and reaffirmed the right of Puerto Rico to self- determination and independence in accordance with the provisions of General Assembly resolution 1514 (XV). At its 1981 and 1982 sessions the Special Com- mittee on decolonization adopted two specific resolu- tions pointing ou~ the need for a discussion of the question in the General Assembly as a separate item. ~onsequence of these interventions, we know, too, what it means to have elections and referenda at a time when a people is subjected to total political, cultural and economic domination. 122. In 1856 we had a President from the United States named William Walker. As a result of his presidency, there was a national war in Central America, waged by the Central American countries, to expel the invader. We also had the so-called elections of 1928, the immediate consequ6nce of which was the Somosa dynasty of such black memory for our people and for the world. 123. Therefore, without prejudging the substance of the problem, my delegation, in the light of the deci- sions of the Special Committee and of the movement of non-aligned countries, will vote for the inclusion of the item on Puerto Rico. 124. Mr. SARRE (Senegal) (interpretation from French): Senegal, faithful to the purposes and prin- ciples of the Charter, has always supported the inalienable right. of peoples to self-determination. Therefore, since our accession to independence we have always supported any initiative to implement the relevant provisions ofthe Charter and in particular resolution 15i4 (XV). 125. With regard to the question before us, the General Committee has, with its traditional wisdom, taken the appropriate decision. Better than that, the people of Puerto Rico, on the basis of its constitu- ·tional'system, has expressed itself, and continues to do so freely, on its future. 126. For an those reasons, my delegation believes that the Assembly should confirm the General Com- mittee's deCIsion. Accordingly, my delegation will vote in favour of the General Committee's decision. 127. Mr. VO ANH TUAN (Viet Nam)(interpretation , from French): The Viet Nam delegation will have the opportunity to congl.-atulate you officially, Mr. Pres- ident, on your election to the high responsibilities of President of the thirty-seventh session of the General Assembly. I shall confine myself to extending to you mv warmest congratulations. 128. With regard to the question before us, the Sccialist Republic of Viet Nam, faithful to its constant policy of supporting peoples struggling against 131. In his statement the representative of Cuba proposed the inclusion in the agenda of the thirty- seventh session of the General Assem.bly of an item entitled "Question of Puerto Rico", which appeared originally as item 137 of the draft agenda, and was not recommended by the General Committee for inclusion in the agenda. 138. The Assembly will take a decision on the proposal of the representative of Cuba in accordance with rule 90 of the rules of procedure. Those in favour of the Cuban proposal will say "Yes". Those who are against it win say "No". Those who abstain will say "Abstention". A roll-call vote has been requested.

I shall now call on those representatives who have asked to be allowed to explain their vote after the voting. 148. We have noted that in the roll-call vote which has just taken place the representative of the Secre- tariat did not call the name -of the .Central African Republic. The Soviet delegation would like to state that such arbitrary actions by members of the Secre- tariat are contrary to the Charter, under which only the General Assembly is competent to decide ~POn matters relating to the right to vote of a State Member of the United Nations in the G.eneral Assembly. 149. The PRESIDENT: The point of order raised by the Soviet delegation will be duly recorded in the proceedings of this meeting. 150. We now proceed to paragraph 21 of the report of the General Committee in which it merely informs the General Assembly that it took note of the sugges- tions made by the Secretary-General regarding the grouping of related items under a single heading and the staggering of more items over two or more years.

We turn now to items 70 to 96. May I take it those items are included in the agenda? It was so decided.

We now come lO item 97, on the question of East Timor.

My delegation wishes to remind the Assembly that East Timor became an integral part of the Republic of Indonesia in 1976, when the process of the decolonization of that Terri- tory was completed following the free and democratic . exercise of the right of its people to self-determination and independence through integration with the Republic of Indonesia. 173. As we stated in the General Committee meeting on 22 September 1982, my delegation strongly opposes the inclusion of item 97, entitled "Question of East Timor" in the agenda of the General Assembly, since such inclusion would constitute unwarranted inter- ference in Indonesia'£ internal affairs and is contrary to Article 2, paragraph 7, of the Charter of the United Nations.

First of all, Sir, I should like to extend to you our warmest congratu- lations on your election to the very important post of President of the thirty-seventh session of the General Assembly. \Vhen the chairman of our delega- tion arrives he will elaborate on our congratulations to you. 175. The delegation of Vanuatu requesteq. to speak today concerning the question of East Timor on instructions from its Government to underscore our firm commitment to the principle of self-determination and independence for all colonized peoples. 176. Vanuatu is a country of the South Pacific region and we have strong bonds of friendship and solidarity with our brothers and sisters of East Timor. When the Portuguese colonial Government was withdrawn in 1974 and East Timor was promised independence we, the people of the then New Hebrides, were looking forward to the birth of a new Meh.:mesian State of East Timor. The people of East Timor are Melanesians, as are we, and we follow their struggle for independence with gfeat admiration and respect. 177. Indonesia invaded East Timor on 7 December 1975 and colonized the Territory by force of arms. The people of East Timor were therefore denied their right ofself-determination and independence. No valid act of self-determination under United Nations superc vision took place there. Indonesia is incapable of producing any evidence to show that the so-called People's Assembly was freely elected; on the con- trary, it was imposed by Indonesia by force of arms. Therefore, we firmly reject the argument that the peopie of East Timor have already exercised their right to self-determination and independence, and fully 180. In May 1976 a puppet assembly of hand-picked people met for three hours and had only one item on the agenda, the integration of East Timor with Indo- nesia. Was the United Nations, it may be asked, involved in this farce? Fortunately, it was not. The then Chairman of the Special Committee, Mr. Salim A. Salim of the United Republic of Tanzania, rightly rejected Indonesia's invitation to get the Special Committee to rubber-stamp the so-called Peoplej s Assembly. 181. Indonesia claims that the people of East Timor voted recently in Indonesia's general elections and managed to get four representatives into the Indone- sian Parliament. Elections in Indonesia, fret and demo- cratic though they may be, are not the concern of the people of East Timor and cannot be a substitute for the right of self-determination and independence of the people of East Timor. 182. The Zimbabwean delegation wishes to make its position very clear. We fully support the inclusion of the question of East Timor in the agenda of the current session because East Timor remains a question of decolonization, and it is the responsibility of th~ international community to see to it that acts of aggression are not rewarded.

Our Foreign Minister and head of our delegation will have the opportunity to congratulate. you, Sir, on yo~r electi~n to the presidency of the thirty-seventh session of trte General Assembly. 184. The People's Republic of Mozambique has been consistent in its. position on the question of East Timor. We fully suppcrt the inclusion of item 97 in the current agenda.

May I take it that item 97 is included in the agenda? It was so decided.

Allow me first, Sir, to take this opportunity to congratulate you on your election to the presidency of the thirtY-3eventh session of the General Assembly. Our good wishes will be expressed officially ~y the Prime Minister of Portugal when he speaks ID the general debate. 187. The decision taken by the Assembly concerning the inclusion of item 97 shows that the Organization is committed to pursue tirelessly the im~lementation of the principle of the self-determination of peoples. This gives us ground for hope that the situatioa of the people of East Timor will not fail to be examined in the light of t~e criteria which hav~ been the basis of 196. I invite members to turn to the list of items recommended for consideration in plenary meetings. May I take it that that allocation is approved by the General Assembly? I Ministers. this item should remain as it appears in . document A/37/250. 197. I call on the representative of the United King- dom, who wishes to make a statement in connection with the allocation of agenda item 135.

Mr~ President, on. my own behclf and on behalf of my delegation. may I offer you sincere congratulations on 203. Therefore, and so as not to reopen the debate, which would lead us into a lengthy exchange of views, the delegation ofVenezuelaconsiders that the inclusion of the item on the question of the Malvinas Islands shOUld be approved in the form in which it was presented in the General Committee's report. That form very clearly reflects the desires of 20 countries of the Latin American region, as expressed ill the letter dated 16 August 1982 addressed to the Secretary- General [see A1371/93] and signed by the Foreign Ministers of Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Colombia, Costa Rica, Cuba. Chile, the Dominican Republic, Ecuador, El Salvador, Guatemala, Haiti, Honduras, Mexico, Nicaragua, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Uruguay and Venezuela.

I support what the representative of Venezuela has just said. We have seen this' morning the complex procedures, the numerous statements and the votes required to modify an item approved and submitted by the General Committee; these would only be magnified in the case of an item approved in plenary meeting. Therefore, as it has been approved in plenary meeting in the form requested by 20 Latin American Member States through their Foreign

My delegation had the honnur and the privilege of requesting tbe inclusion in the agenda of the item on the question of the Malvinas Islands on behalf of a group of 20 Latin American Foreign Ministers; this has now been decided on, and my delegation considers that any change at this time could give rise to unnece:~sary debate on the substance 211. The delegation of Peru considers that the proposal made by the representative of Venezuela, supported by other delegations which have spoken, is the most appropriate one. Since the General Com- mittee decided without difficulty to recommend the inclusion of the item on the Malvinas Islands as it appears in -document A/37/250, we feel that it is unnecessary to reopen a debate on the subject. 212. Sir John THOMSON (United Kingdom): I think perhaps it would be useful if I clarified what my proposal was. I have heard several representatives say that we should not reopen a proposal, a decision, on an item. I am not proposing to alter the item. The title of the item remains, in the beliefof my delegation, what it was at the end of the discussion in the General Committee, namely, as set out in document A/37/250, •'Question of the Falkland Islands (Mal- vinas)" in English, and otherwise in Spanish. 213. What I am proposing is no amendment to the title. It is only an amendment to accord with normal United Nations practice regarding the way in which the item is considered under the heading of allocation of items. I repeat that my proposal is that it should be considered directly in plenary meeting, with the addition of the words: 219. The question, which is being treated as some- thing rather simple, has in fact an important content. The British delegation is attempting to confuse matters before the General Assembly. The situation of the victims ofapartheid, for example, or the victims ofthe situation in Namibia, cannot be compared with the situatiLofi prevailing on the Malvinas Islands. There is a whole complex of background factors present in the case of agenda items 32 and 33. 220, The United Kingdom is a member ofthe General Committee and he had an opportunity to present this matter in that Committee. However, the representa- 222. As I understand it, no one is denying the inclusion of the item on the Falklands (MalviJlas). I also understand that no one·is denying that it ~hould be considered in plenary meeting. There is a problem, however, and that is the problem that petitioners and individuals are, by practice or conveution, not able to appear here in pler~ary meeting. It is for that reason that the General Assembly has in the past devised the practice whereby petitioners and indi- viduals who wish to have their views taken into account may appear before the relevant General Assembly committee. It seems to me that that is precisely what the British delegation is proposing today, and· we support it. We support it because it is normal practice. It does, if you will, bear on the question of freedom of speech, and we frankly think it would be untoward to deny in regard to this item and on this occasion what has been an essential position adopted in the Assembly in the past. 223. We do, therefore, support the British amend- ment. We think that the amendment is procedural, and we hape that the Assembly agrees to it.

The delegation of Uruguay wishes to support the delegations of Venezuela, Ecuador, Costa Rica and Honduras in their position that this para- graph of the report of the General Committee remain unaltered.

The Assembly is faced with the following situati()~l: the report of the General Committ~e does not contain what the representativ~ of the United Kingdom has suggested at this particular juncture with regard to discussion ofthis issue. At the same time, the representative of the United Kingdom has asked for a vote on his proposed amendment. We must now vote on the amendment proposed by the United Kingdom, and in order to cla.ify the matter, I shall read out the text that has been proposed.

Regarding agenda item 18, the General COrilfTIittee recommends in paragraph 24 (a) (ii) that the Assembly shtJuld refer to the Fourth C,mmittee all the chapters of the. report of the Special Committee relating to specific Territories so that the , General Assembly may deal in plenary meeting with the question of the implementation of the Declaration as a whole. May I take it that the General Assembly approves that recommendation? It tpas so decided. 226. The text, as amended, would read as follows: "The General Committee decided to recommend to tile General Assembly that the item should be considered directly in plenary meeting." The representative of the United Kingdom has proposed adding the following: " ... on the underLtsnding that bodies and individuals having an int~restin the question would be heard ;11 the Fourth CGmmittee in conjunction with con- sideration of the item in plenary meeting."

The proposal of the United Kingdom has been adopted and the understanding formulated by the United Kingdom delegation in its proposal will therefore be reflected in the record. 229. With regard to item 8 of the agenda, I call the Assembly's attention to the recommendation of the General Committee in paragraph 24 (a) (i) that sub-item (b), "Subsid;ary organs of the G~neral Ass~mbly", should be allocated to the Fifth Com- mittee with the suggestion that it be considered within the framework of agenda item 108, on the pattern of conferences. May I take it that the General Assembly approves that recommendation? it was so decided. 23L The PRESIDENT: We turn now to the recom- mendation of the General Committee on the alloca- tion of agenda item 32, on the question of Namibia. The recommendation appears in paragraph 24 (a) (iii).

I now invite the Assembly to turn its attention to paragraph 24 (a) (v) regarding the question of Cyprus, in which the General Committee recommends that the General Assembly should defer a decision on the allocation of the item to an appro- priate time in the future. May I take it that the General Assembly approves that recommendation?

May I now take it that the General Assembly approves the allocation ofthe other items listed for consideration directly in plenary meeting? It wa.v so decided.

We turn now to the list of items which the General Committee has recom- mended for allocation to the First Committee. 236. Regarding item 17 on the list, concerning general and complete disarmament, the General Committee recommends in paragraph 24 (b) (i) that the relevant paragraphs of the annual report of IAEA, which is to be considered directly in plenary meeting under agenda item 14, should be drawn to the attent~on of th~ First Committee in connection with its coasid- eration of agenda item 55. May I t~;e it that the Assembly approves that recommendation? It was so decided.

Regarding item 23 on the list, on the relationship between disarmament and develop- ment, the General Committee, in paragraph 24 (b) (ii), recommends that the item should be allocated to the First Committee on the understanding th;;t the development aspects of the question would be brought to the attention ofthe Second Comm.ittee in connection with its consideration of item 71, on development and international economic co-operation. May I take it that the Assembly approves this recommendation? It was so decided. 246. With regar~ to item 3 on..the list, concerning' programme planmng, the General Committee, in para- graph 24 (e) (i), recommends that each chapter of the proposed medium-term phm should "be submitte<t to the appropriate Main Committee of the General Assembly before the plan as' a whole is adopted by the Ass~mbly in plenary meeting. May I take it that the General Assembly adoph that recommendation? It was so decided.

Regarding item 6 on the list, entitled "Joint Inspection Unit: reports of the Joint Inspection Unit" , the General Committee recommends in paragraph 24 (e) (ii) that the item should be allocated to the Fifth Committee with the underst~nding that the reports of the Joint Inspection Unit dealing with subject matters assigned to other Main Committees would also be referred to those Commiti:ees. May I take it that the General Assembly adopts that recommendation ~nd approves the recommendation

We come now to the list of it~;ms proposed. for allocation to the Sixth Committee. May I take it t.hat the General Assembly approves that proposed allocation?

The General Assembly has thus adopted the agenda and the allocation of agenda items for the thirty-seventh session (decision 37/402). 250. I wish to thank the m{:mbels of the Assembly for their co-operation, \\hich has made it possible for us to complete our task, ,uhich was not easy. I very much appreciate their co-oJmrati0t1. NOTE'~ I See A/2428. 3 The delegations of Italy and bamoa subsequentmy informed ~he Secretariat that they had intended to ':jilte in favour of the amend- ment; the delegation of Colombia ~hat it had intended to vote against it.