This issue covers the work of the Security Council from the 503d meeting on September 27, 1950 to the 530th meeting on November 30, 1950. The Presidents of the Council were Sir Gladwyn Jebb (United Kingdom), Warren Austin (United States), and Ales Bebler (Yugoslavia) during September, October and November respectively.

The ninth session of the Trusteeship Council met from June 5 to July 30, 1951. On the opening day of the session the Soviet representative proposed that the Central People's Government of the People's Republic of China be invited to participate in the meetings of the Council; a motion by the representative of the United States (Sayre) to postpone indefinitely a discussion of the Soviet proposal was adopted by 11 votes to I. The Council then elected Sir Allan Burnes (United Kingdom) President and Mr. Khalidy (Iraq), vicepresident and adopted an agenda of sixteen items.

This issue covers the work of the Security Council from its 531st meeting on January 31, 1951 to its 540th meeting on April 2, 1951. Following in alphabetical order the presidents were the representatives of Ecuador (Quevedo), France (Lacoste), India (Rau) and Netherlands (Balluseck). Sir Benegal Rauceded the presidency to D. von Balluseck during March as the India-Pakistan question was under discussion in the Council during that month. New members welcomed at the meeting on January 31 were Carlos Muniz (Brazil), D. von Balluseck (Netherlands) and Selim Sarper (Turkey) replacing the delegates of Norway, Egypt and Cuba. During discussion of die India-Pakistan question, Sir Zafrulla Khan (Pakistan) was invited to the Council table.

This issue covers the work of the Security Council from its 541st meeting on April 17, 1951 to its 548th meeting on May 29th. The President during April was the representative of the Netherlands (Balluseck) and during May the representative of Turkey (Sarper). During discussion of the Israeli-Syrian dispute representatives of those countries as well as Major-General William R. Riley, Chief of Staff, Truce Supervision Organization, were invited to the Council table. During discussion of the India-Pakistan question the representative of Pakistan participated in the discussion.

A spontaneous movement, among members of the Secretariat, “to do something directly and personally toward helping India in her present dangerous food crisis” resulted in the establishment, on April 17, 1951, of an unofficial committee — the United Nations Secretariat Committee for Food Relief to India. Dr. Ralph Bunche, who was elected its chairman, wrote to the staffs of all United Nations offices, missions, and specialized agencies not located at the permanent headquarters, suggesting that they join in the effort. The committee accepted the offer of the United Nations International Children's Emergency Fund to use the services of its procurement division in obtaining the wheat. United Kingdom, United States, and Netherlands shipping companies which were members of the India, Pakistan, Ceylon, and Burma Outward Freight Conference in New York had waived transportation costs as a gesture of sympathy with the Secretariat's efforts. The first shipment of wheat reached Bombay on July 16, 1951. By August 1, total contributions were in excess of $20,000.

The twelfth session of the Economic and Social Council, which opened in February 20, 1950, in Santiago, Chile, represented the first meeting of a major United Nations organ in Latin America. Its agenda of some 35 items included several new topics for discussion, among them consideration of the General Assembly's policy decisions on the draft Covenant on Human Rights and measures for its implementation, the question of relief and rehabilitation for Korea, and possible emergency action by the Council and the specialized agencies to assist in the maintenance of international peace and security.

The eleventh session of the Economic and Social Council, which had been suspended on August 16, 1950, reconvened at Lake Success in October to consider the urgent problems of assistance to the civilian population of Korea, plans for the relief and rehabilitation of Korea, and the study of long-term measures to promote the economic development and social progress of Korea. In addition, the Council was to complete its work on the calendar of meetings for 1951 and decide upon the venue of the twelfth session.

The twelfth session of the Economic and Social Council met in Santiago, Chile from February 20 to March 21, 1951. Hernan Santa Cruz (Chile) was re-elected President of the Council and Sir Ramaswami Mudaliar (India) was elected first vice-president following an unsuccessful attempt by the Soviet delegate (Chernyshev) to unseat the nationalist Chinese delegate.

The Trusteeship Council met in a special session on November 22 and decided not to hold its ninth session away from permanent headquarters. The Council also decided that it would consider the annual reports for 1949 and 1950 on the six African trust territories at the ninth session, thus expediting the examination of annual reports and reducing the time interval between submission to, and examination by, the Council.

This issue covers only the work of the Trusteeship Council and its subsidiary organs which had been completed before the opening of the ninth session on June 5, 1951.

The General Assembly of the United Nations voted on November 1, 1950 to continue Trygve Lie in the office of the Secretary-General of the United Nations for an additional three years and following the vote, Mr. Lie addressed the plenary meeting. He stated that the United Nations could not function effectively unless the Secretariat acted in loyal conformity with the decisions and recommendations of the organs of the United Nations and by the same token the Secretariat must act in the collective interest of the United Nations. He pledged that as Secretary-General he would remain impartial to all countries. He pointed out that the United Nations' road to peace required universal collective security, but that a persistent effort for the reconciliation of conflicting interests plus a strong program for an adequate standard of living throughout the world were also necessary for peace.

In a cable dated July 9, 1951, from Foreign Minister Bagher Kazemi to the Secretary-General of the United Nations, Iran withdrew its acceptance of compulsory jurisdiction by the International Court of Justice. Referring specifically to the Court's order on interim measures (issued on July 5), the cable stated that the Court “had shaken the confidence” which the Iranian government and people had always had in international justice. The Iranian note made four specific points: first, the Iranian declaration (ratified on September 19, 1932) accepting the compulsory jurisdiction of the Permanent Court, and extended to the International Court of Justice under the latter's Statute, extended such jurisdiction only to disputes relating to the application of treaties and conventions. The Declaration excluded questions within the exclusive jurisdiction of Iran. Agreements or contracts under private and domestic law (such as concessions to work certain sources of natural wealth, commercial matters, and matters relating to Iran's sovereign rights) “were and still are excluded” from compulsory jurisdiction of the Court. Second, the note pointed out that the concession granted the “former Anglo-Iranian Oil Company” in 1933 did not mention the United Kingdom in any capacity and reserved no rights or powers to that government.

On December 22 the Secretary-General, Trygve Lie, together with his advisors departed for Europe to choose a site for the 1951 General Assembly meeting. Prior to his departure he named a staff committee composed of Col. Alfred G. Katzin, A. H. Feller and Dragloslav Protitch to coordinate the work of the Secretariat in connection with the program of united action for peace. Dragoslav Protitch was named to serve as secretary of the Peace Observation Commission and Henri Vigier was selected to serve as chairman for the Committee on Collective Measures.

The International Court of Justice handed down its decision in the Colombian-Peruvian asylum case on November 20, 1950. The application had been submitted by Colombia to the Court under article 7 of the Protocol of Friendship and Cooperation between Colombia and Peru, Articles 40 and 36, paragraph 1 of the Statute, and article 32 of the rules of procedure. Colombia submitted two questions for the Court's adjudication: 1) within the limits of the obligations resulting from the Bolivarian Agreement on Extradition of 1911 and the Havana Convention of 1938 in particular, and general American international law, was Colombia competent to qualify unilaterally and definitively the nature of the offense for which diplomatic asylum had been granted, and 2) was Peru, the territorial state, obliged to grant a safe-conduct to Víctor Raúl Haya de la Torre, the refugee who had been granted asylum in the Colombian embassy in Lima. The pertinent facts of the case were: 1) on October 3, 1948 there had been a military rebellion in Peru which had been put down immediately; 2) on October 4, 1948 the Peruvian government charged the American People's Revolutionary Alliance, a political party of which Haya de la Torre was the leader, with attempted rebellion and stated that its leaders would be brought to justice; 3) on October 27, 1948 there was a coup d'etat in Peru and a subsequent decree which prescribed summary procedure in cases of rebellion; and 4) on January 3, 1949 Haya de la Torre sought and was granted asylum in the Colombian embassy.

The twelfth session of the Council of the Food and Agriculture Organization opened at the new headquarters of the organization in Rome on June 11, 1951. The agenda of the session included detailed studies of long-range objectives of FAO, international investment, full employment, commodity problems, and technical assistance. Preparation for the sixth session of the FAO Conference, scheduled to meet in Rome in November 1951, was also undertaken at this meeting.

During March and April, Secretary-General Lie visited France, Yugoslavia, Greece, Egypt, Syria, Lebanon, Turkey and Israel. The trip was made in accordance with his custom of visiting Member countries upon their invitation. His journey had no special political significance “except to advance the cause of the United Nations as the best hope for the peaceful settlement of the many conflicts that now divide the world so dangerously.”

In the annual report on the work of the Food and Agriculture Organization for the year 1949/50, the Director-General, Norris E. Dodd, stated that FAO activities especially in technical assistance and farming methods could fill a great need in existing world conditions. Recent developments expected to have an influence on FAO were listed as the 1) Korean crisis, 2) expanded technical assistance program, 3) removal of FAO headquarters to Rome and 4) possibility of ECOSOC studies on full employment. There was to be a continued differentiation between the usual technical assistance program of FAO which was concerned with short-range projects and the expanded technical assistance program which would involve the assignment of technicians for lengthy periods; the two programs were to be subject to separate accounting. The removal of the organization's headquarters to Rome necessitated the establishment of a regional office in North America to maintain close contact with the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development and the International Monetary Fund because with the expanded technical assistance program cooperation with these agencies was more important than ever. The Director-General proposed that four sub-regional offices for Latin America be established: one at Mexico City for Mexico and the Caribbean area, one at Rio de Janeiro for the eastern portion of South America, and another at Santiago for the western portion of South America, and finally one at Bogotá or Caraças for the Gran Colombian region.

The sixth annual report of the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development to the Board of Governors, covering the period July 1, 1950 to June 30, 1951, was transmitted by the President of the Bank (Black) to the Board on September 10, 1951. During the fiscal year reviewed in the report the Bank was faced with new and changing conditions in the world; while this was true of every other year since 1946, “at no time in the Bank's experience, however, have die economic conditions of the world changed so abruptly as in the year just ended.” These changes had two conflicting results: on die one hand, diey provided underdeveloped countries “opportunities for growth” and “created more favorable conditions for die Bank's lending operations”; on die odier hand, diey raised serious new problems.

Following the decisions of the International Court of Justice on November 20 and 27, 1950 on the question of asylum for the refugee, Victor Raul Haya de la Torre, the government of Colombia (on December 13, 1950) instituted new proceedings before the Court against the government of Peru. The applicationof Colombia requested the Court to adjudge and declare, in pursuance of Article 7 of the Protocol of Friendship and Cooperation of 1934 in force between Colombia and Peru, the manner in which effect should be given to the Court's judgment of November 20, 1950, and in particular whether Colombia was or was not bound to deliver Victor Raul Haya de la Torre, a refugee in the Colombian embassy at Lima, to the government of Peru. As an alternative claim, in the event that the principal claim was disallowed, Colombia requested the Court to declare in exercise of its ordinary competence whether, in accordance with the law in force between Colombia and Peru and particularly American international law, the government of Colombia was or was not bound to deliver Haya de la Torre to the government of Peru.

Following the judgments of the International Court of Justice on November 20, 1950 and November 27, 1950 (the request for an interpretation of the judgment), the government of Colombia filed a new claim requesting the Court to adjudge and declare the manner in which effect should be given to the judgment of November 20, and in particular whether Colombia was bound to deliver to the government of Peru Víctor Raúl Haya de la Torre. As an alternative claim Colombia requested that the Court declare whether in accordance with the law in force between the parties and particularly American international law Colombia was or was not bound to deliver the refugee to the government of Peru. In a letter the Colombian agent informed the Court that his government relied on the Convention on Asylum signed at Havana on February 29, 1928; under Article 63 of the Statute of the Court, the government of Cuba as a signatory to that convention submitted a declaration of intervention which contained Cuba's views on the construction of the Convention of Havana of 1928 as well as its general attitude on asylum. A public hearing was held by the Court on May 15 to determine the admissibility of the Cuban intervention to which the government of Peru had objected on the ground that the Court had given a judgment on the construction of the Havana Convention of 1928, and that it was an attempt by a third state to appeal against the judgment of November 20.