40 No. 75 JUSTICE individually.165 The wording of Article 80 was negotiated in consideration of the Mandate over Palestine.166 Thus, both the Jewish people’s longstanding claim to this area, as well as the continuation of the Mandate’s terms and obligations – including the requirement to establish a Jewish national home in Mandatory Palestine – were upheld by the UN Charter.167 In another effort to end the Mandate, in early 1947 Britain requested the General Assembly to consider the Palestine issue.168 The request itself did not constitute a surrender of the Mandate, and the British acknowledged the continuation of the Mandate and their obligations thereunder while the UN considered the issue.169 The General Assembly voted to approve the request and established the United Nations Special Committee on Palestine (UNSCOP). UNSCOP recommended dividing the Mandate area into Jewish and Arab states and putting Jerusalem and its environs under international control (called a corpus separatum). A subsequent committee, the Ad Hoc Committee on the Palestine Question, was established to consider UNSCOP’s reports and possible implementation; this committee, too, recommended partition. On 29 November 1947, the General Assembly adopted these recommendations in Resolution 181(II),170 calling for the establishment of a Jewish state, an Arab state, and an international special regime for the Jerusalem region. The Resolution also established the Palestine Commission in order to work with the parties to implement these recommendations. While the Jewish representative organizations accepted these recommendations,171 the Resolution was rejected, violently, by the various Arab states in the region, as well as by local Arab communities in the Mandate 165. U.N. Charter art. 80, https://legal.un.org/repertory/art80/english/rep_orig_vol4_art80.pdf 166. Huntington Gilchrist, Colonial Questions at the San Francisco Conference, 39(5) Amer. Pol. Sci. Rev. 982, 990991(1945) (referring to Article 80 in saying that “[t]his clause resulted from the fears of mandatory powers lest their legal position in the mandated territories be taken away out of hand by the trusteeship system. There were also fears on the part of minority groups (such as the supporters of the Jewish people in relation to Palestine) lest their privileges under the League Covenant and the mandates should be taken away”); State of Israel Office of the Attorney General, supra note 22, ¶ 28. The Arab states were aware of this importance and attempted, unsuccessfully, to ensure different wording for the Charter; see SABEL, supra note 21, at 90. 167. The ICJ considered Article 80 in the South-West Africa Advisory Opinion, noting that “…as far as mandated territories are concerned, to which paragraph 2 of this article refers – this provision presupposes that the rights of States and peoples shall not lapse automatically on the dissolution of the League of Nations. It obviously was the intention to safeguard the rights of States and peoples under all circumstances and in all respects, until each territory should be placed under the Trusteeship System.” International Status of South-West Africa, Advisory Opinion of 11 July 1950, supra note 15, at 134; Judge van Wyk, in a dissenting opinion to an ICJ judgement in a further case concerning South-West Africa, stated: “Article 80(1) of the Charter of the United Nations applied as much to Palestine as it applied to South West Africa”; see SouthWest Africa Cases (Liber. v. S. Afr.), Preliminary Objections, 1962 I.C.J 636 (Dec. 21). 168. The request was submitted under the authority of the UN Charter, which provided the General Assembly the authority to “discuss any questions or any matters within the scope of the Charter… and… may make recommendations… on any such questions or matters”. see U.N. Charter, supra note 29, art. 10. 169. HC Deb (18 Feb. 1947) (433) Cols. 988-989, https://api.parliament.uk/historic-hansard/commons/1947/feb/18/ palestine-conference-government-policy#column_988 (“[w]e have, therefore, reached the conclusion that the only course now open to us is to submit the problem to the judgment of the United Nations….”); see also Letter from Alexander Cadogan to Dr. Victor Chi Tsai Hoo, Assistant Sec. Gen., U.N. Doc. A/286 (Apr. 2, 1947), https://www. un.org/unispal/document/auto-insert-189500/. 170. G. A. Res. 181 (II), U.N. Doc. A/RES/181(II) (Nov. 29, 1947) (hereinafter Resolution 181(II)). 171. SABEL, supra note 21, at 95-95.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjgzNzA=