Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-l7hp2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-30T20:30:25.356Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

From Sacred Trust to Self-Determination

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 May 2009

J.F. Engers
Get access

Extract

The codification of international law concerning the non-self-governing territories has proceeded through three distinct phases in this century. Article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations contained the notion that the well-being and the development of dependent peoples was the sacred trust of civilization. This concept legally applied only to the mandated territories, but in fact embodied the then current philosophy of the colonial powers. It implied that the territories should not be exploited for the benefit of the administering authorities; it was, however, a fairly static view, which did not even indicate to what end the “development” was to lead.

Type
Articles
Information
Netherlands International Law Review , Volume 24 , Issue 1-2 , May 1977 , pp. 85 - 91
Copyright
Copyright © T.M.C. Asser Press 1977

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Ross, A., The United Nations; Peace and Progress, (Totowa, New Jersey: The Bedminstor Press, 1966), p. 386.Google Scholar

2. Cf. Sohn, L.B.; “The Development of the Charter of the United Nations”Google Scholar; in: Bos, M., ed., The Present State of International Law, p. 50Google Scholar; Higgins, R., The Development of International Law through the Political Organs of the United Nations (London: Oxford U.P., 1963), pp. 90–106.Google Scholar

3. Akehurst, M., A Modern Introduction to International Law (London: Allen and Unwin, 1970), pp. 281–283.Google Scholar

4. Sohn, L.B., op. cit., p. 52Google Scholar, reaches this conclusion on somewhat different grounds. The opposite point of view is represented by Van Lelyveld, , “Over bevrijdings-bewegingen, politiek en recht”, 28 Int. Spectator (1974), 362–371.Google Scholar

5. See Aranjo-Ruiz, G., “The Normative Role of the General Assembly of the United Nations and the Declaration of Principles of Friendly Relations”Google Scholar, in 137 Rec. des cours de l'Académie de droit international de la Haye (1972–III), pp. 419–628Google Scholar, and the literature cited there. See also, Bos, M., “Staatssteun aan buitenlandse opstandelingen volkenrechtelijk en politiek beoordeeld”, 27 Int. Spectator (1973), p. 722–731.Google Scholar

6. United Nations Document A/PV.2305, pp. 46–47 (provisional text).

7. United Nations Document A/8723 (Part I) annex I. (G.A. O.R., 27th session, suppl. 23).

8. United Nations Document A/8989.

9. Martens III, No. 54: ibidem, 2ème série XXXII, No. 17.

10. An oblique reference to self-determination for Macau may be seen in the address of the Portuguese representative in the General Assembly on 3 December 1974: “if, here and there, there has been an occasional lack of precise detail, or if a strict timetable has not been established, that is only due to our respect for those whose opinions we want to know, and whose wishes we want to comply with.” (italics added), A/PV. 2305, p. 47 (provisional text).