Foreign Relations of the United States, 1952–1954, United Nations Affairs, Volume III

IO files, US/A/3596

Position Paper Prepared in the Department of State for the United States Delegation to the Eighth Regular Session of the General Assembly

restricted

[Washington,] September 14, 1953.

Hearing of Petitioners From the Trust Territory of the Cameroons Under French Administration: Report of the Trusteeship Council (Resolution 655 (VII) of December 21, 1952)

the problem

The Seventh Assembly, after the Fourth Committee had heard two petitioners from the French Cameroons adopted Resolution 655 (VII), which asked the Trusteeship Council to investigate further the questions raised by the petitioners and to report to the Eighth Assembly. As a result of a reorganization of its schedule, the Trusteeship Council postponed all French Cameroons’ questions to its Thirteenth Session (January–February 1954), at which time the questions raised by the petitioners from the French Cameroons will be considered in conjunction with the 1952 Annual Reports and the 1952 Visiting Mission Report on the two Cameroons. The problem may be complicated by the fact that the Fourth Committee may decide even in the absence of a Council report on this question to deal with it substantively at this session or to grant oral hearings requested by certain groups in the Cameroons.

united states position

1. The Delegation should support a resolution which would postpone Assembly consideration of the substance of this question to the next session when it will have before it a report from the Trusteeship Council on this matter.

2. Inasmuch as the Council has already agreed to hear certain groups from the Cameroons next January, it would be preferable for all requests from Cameroons’ groups to be brought to the attention of the Council so that there will be an opportunity for all relevant information on the Cameroons to be placed before the Council at one time. If, nevertheless, requests from Cameroons’ groups for hearings before the Fourth Committee are put to a vote, the Delegation should abstain.

3. If the Fourth Committee holds hearings or otherwise deals with the substance of this question, the Delegation should take the position that the records of any statements or debates should be transmitted to the Trusteeship Council to be taken into account in its review of Cameroons questions, and that it would be inappropriate for the Committee to arrive at any conclusions on these questions until it has before it the Council’s report on them, i.e. at the Assembly’s Ninth Session.

comment

1. At the Assembly’s Seventh Session the Fourth Committee granted oral hearings to five groups from the French Cameroons:

1. The NGONDO (Traditional Assembly of the Douala People)

2. The U.P.C. (Union des Populations du Cameroun)

3. The Cameroons Socialist Party

4. The Groupements Musulman du Cameroun

5. The Bloc Democratique Camerounais

Three of these were unable to send representatives, but the Committee did hear statements from the U.P.C. representative, Mr. Ruben Um Nyobe, and a representative of the Cameroons Socialist Party, Mr. Charles Rene Okala.

In the brief discussion following these statements, some Members pointed out that it was almost impossible to discuss the substance of the matters raised by the petitioners in the absence of other relevant information, including the 1952 Annual Reports on the two Cameroons and the Report of the 1952 Visiting Mission to these territories. (As the U.P.C. seeks unification of the two Cameroons, reports on both territories are relevant.) At the close of this discussion the Assembly adopted Resolution 655 (VII), which, after pointing out that the Trusteeship Council had not examined the 1952 Annual Reports or Visiting Mission Reports on the Cameroons and “that these Reports may give a fuller account of the matter,” asked the Council to investigate further the questions raised by the petitioners. Thus, in this resolution the Assembly recognized the relationship between the matters raised in the Fourth Committee hearings and the 1952 Annual and Visiting Mission Reports.

At the Twelfth Session of the Trusteeship Council the Representative of France stated that he did not feel that the Council could deal effectively with this question at that time. He pointed out that there was litle or no new information brought out in the Fourth Committee hearings. Moreover, the 1952 Annual Reports were not yet issued, and they and the Visiting Mission Reports on the Cameroons were scheduled to be considered by the Council at its Thirteenth Session in January 1954. He therefore proposed that the consideration of the matters raised by the petitioners be considered at that session along with all the other information on the Cameroons. This resolution was approved by a vote of 10 to 0 to 1, and two French Cameroons’ groups, who had petitioned for oral hearings before the Council (the Ngondo and the Kumzse) were informed that they would be heard at the Council’s Thirteenth Session.

2. Two groups from the French Cameroons have requested hearings before the Fourth Committee this year. These are:

1. ESOCAM (Evolution Sociale Camerounaise)

2. NGONDO (Traditional Assembly of the Douala People)

It is possible that other groups will also request hearings. Since the matters on which they wish to be heard have been referred to the Trusteeship Council, which has decided to consider them at its Thirteenth Session (January 1954), it would appear to serve no useful purpose to hear additional Cameroons’ viewpoints in the Fourth Committee at this time. If these requests were to be brought to the attention of the Council, which has already accorded two hearings to Cameroons’ groups at its Thirteenth Session, it could decide whether or not it would be useful to hear these additional viewpoints. However, inasmuch as two groups from the French Cameroons were heard by the Fourth Committee last year, there is some merit in the contention that other legitimate groups in the Territory should be accorded the same privilege. The United States would therefore abstain on proposals to grant hearings in the Fourth Committee on the grounds that, while it is not opposed to all legitimate Cameroons viewpoints being heard, it would prefer the more orderly procedure of allowing the Trusteeship Council to consider these requests for hearings first. It is understood that the French Delegation will also abstain on requests for hearings from groups in the French Cameroons.

3. Without the report of the Trusteeship Council on its investigation of the matters raised in last year’s Cameroons hearings, the Fourth Committee would find it almost impossible to reach any definite conclusion on these matters this year, even if it were to hear certain additional Cameroons viewpoints on these matters. It would appear logical, therefore, for all additional views and information brought out in this year’s Fourth Committee on Cameroons questions to be transmitted to the Trusteeship Council, following last year’s precedent. The Council would then be able to take all available elements into account in arriving at conclusions and formulating its report on Cameroons questions to the next Assembly.