صور الصفحة
PDF
النشر الإلكتروني

The other rights provided for in the agreement relate to publicly elected bodies, public office and public functions "established by national law." In the United States, the term "National Law", as it appears in this convention can only be taken to mean Federal law. The history of and official United Nations commentary on the convention fully support this interpretation of the term. That the Constitution bars arbitrary discrimination against women in their eligibility for Federal elected bodies and in their right to hold Federal office or to exercise functions in the Federal Government cannot be doubted. On the other hand, categorizations dependent upon the natural differences between women and men are permitted under our Constiution, and I understand such categorizations to be permissible under the present convention. Thus. for example, the history of the convention establishes that the terms "public office" and "public functions" were not intended to apply to military service. In voting for the convention, the United States delegate, Mrs. Eleanor Roosevelt, stated the understanding of the United States in this regard, adding that we understood the term "public office" to be coterminous with "public function".

If the Senate were to decide to give its advice and consent to United States accession to the convention, it might wish to indicate its understanding on these two points. Although I personally believe that this is not necessary, in light of Mrs. Roosevelt's statement, I would note that President Kennedy recommended such an understanding when he submitted the convention to the Senate in 1963.

As you can see, then, each of these conventions coincides very closely with the expressed principles and values of the United States. Each is a simple, forthright document, aimed at the achievement of a common international standard on matters of interest to the international community. And each is concerned with the eradication of social abuses that could and that have, at times, become sources of bitter differences among nations. In my view there is no doubt that these agreements are valid and proper subjects of the treaty power.

Before concluding, however, I wish to lay before you several further considerations that seem to me to indicate the advisability of United States ratification of these agreements.

The first is that there is a widely shared view in this country that we should take immediate steps to live up to our public professions of interest in the human rights field. Judging by the expressions of opinion that have come to the attention of the Administration, ratification would appear to fulfill the wishes of the American people.

The second point I want to make is that now is a particularly appropriate time for favorable consideration of these conventions. The General Assembly of the United Nations has proclaimed 1968 as the International Year for Human Rights, a year for new achievements and progress in this most important of areas of international concern. In my view we would usher in the International Year for Human Rights most felicitously by adherence to these conventions. For in so doing, we would demonstrate that this nation will not stand aloof from a major world effort to elevate human rights standards everywhere. Thirdly, and perhaps most significantly, there are the tremendous consequences of our decision whether to ratify these conventions. I do not mean solely the consequences for the United States, which I have previously mentioned. I am referring, also, to the consequences for the conventions themselves. for their effectiveness and for the respect their provisions can command. Without the support of the United States, these agreements may appear insignificant to many other countries. If we do not consider it important to sign the conventions, why should they? And more importantly, why should they implement the conventions?

With United States ratification, on the other hand, these conventions would have a new life. In expressing our acceptance and in faithfully implementing the provisions of these agreements, we would encourage states that have thus far withheld adherence to reconsider their position. When there are departures from the standards that the conventions lay down, the United States would be able, as a state party, to exert its influence to bring about renewed observance of those standards.

A tremendous impetus would thus be provided for the worldwide battle for human rights. And the solemn human rights provisions of the United Nations Charter would receive some real content. I believe that the United States, with its profound commitment to the rule of law, can only contemplate such a prospect with approval.

We are. after all, a nation that stands for something in world history. “Certain unalienable rights" were proclaimed in 1776 as the heritage of “all men”— not just Americans. Abraham Lincoln said there was "something in that Declaration giving liberty not alone to the people of this country, but hope for the world, for all future time."

It is deep in our American character to believe in this. And the influence of those brave words of 1776, in country after country, generation after generation down to our own day, is solid proof that these ideas are universal and that they can move men to action on a very large scale. When such ideas come to the surface anywhere in the world, our national conscience does not allow us to be indifferent to them.

I would urge your Committee to recommend to the Senate that it advise and consent to all three of the conventions before you.

Senator DODD. Mr. Ambassador, we thank you. I believe personally that this is a most scholarly, highly impressive, and profound explanation of these three conventions, I would say it was in the best "Goldberg tradition." I think you have done a great service to the committee, to all of the Senate and, indeed, to the country.

Senator Clark.

Senator CLARK. Thank you Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Ambassador, I am sure you do not need me to tell you that I think you have made a splendid presentation. I shall support all three of these conventions.

PARTIES TO THE CONVENTIONS

I would like to round out the record, if I might, a little bit. There has been handed to me a list of the countries which have already ratified each of these three conventions. With respect to the convention dealing with the abolition of slavery, I find there are 68 countries which have ratified. I ask, Mr. Chairman, consent to have the list of those countries printed in the record.

Senator DODD. Without objection, it is so ordered. (The document referred to follows:)

THE SUPPLEMENTARY CONVENTION ON THE ABOLITION OF SLAVERY, THE SLAVE TRADE, AND INSTITUTIONS AND PRACTICES SIMILAR TO SLAVERY

[blocks in formation]

THE SUPPLEMENTARY CONVENTION ON THE ABOLITION OF SLAVERY, THE SLAVE TRADE, AND INSTITUTIONS AND PRACTICES SIMILAR TO SLAVERY-Continued

[blocks in formation]

Date of Receipt of Instru-
ment of Ratification or
Accession (a)

March 21, 1958
May 28, 1959
August 21, 1963
May 11, 1962 *
June 13, 1958

April 24, 1958
October 31, 1962 (a)
March 29, 1960 (a)
January 14, 1959
April 1, 1959 (a)
May 26, 1964
May 3, 1963 (a)
February 12, 1958
February 26, 1958

November 17, 1965

June 23, 1960

December 30, 1959 (a)

September 30, 1963

September 18, 1961 (a) October 23, 1957 February 12, 1958 July 30, 1964 * September 27, 1957 (a) January 18, 1963 (a) September 9, 1957 (a) August 2, 1965 (a) November 18, 1957 (a) January 3, 1966 * June 30, 1959 May 11, 1959 (a) January 7, 1963 (a) December 3, 1957 April 26, 1962 (a) July 22, 1963 (a) June 26, 1961 * May 3, 1960

March 20, 1958

November 17, 1964 (a)

January 10, 1963

August 10, 1959

November 13, 1957

March 13, 1962 *

September 9, 1957

October 28, 1959 (a)

July 28, 1964 (a)

April 17, 1958 (a)1 November 28, 1962 (a)

April 11, 1966 *

July 15, 1966 (a)

July 17, 1964

August 12, 1964 (a)

December 3, 1958

April 12, 1957

[blocks in formation]

Yugoslavia_.--.

Total, 68.

May 20, 1958

*Declaration that it considers itself bound as from date of independence. 1 Accession by the United Arab Republic.

Senator CLARK. With respect to the Convention Concerning the Abolition of Forced Labor, there are 75 countries which have ratified, and I ask the same permission with respect to that list.

Senator DODD. Yes. The same ruling, without objection. (The document referred to follows:)

CONVENTION CONCERNING THE ABOLITION OF FORCED LABOR

(ILO Convention No. 105)

ADOPTED BY THE INTERNATIONAL LABOR CONFERENCE AT GENEVA, JUNE 25, 1957

Afghanistan_.

Argentina

Australia.

Austria.

Belgium

Brazil

Burundi.

Cameroon.

Canada__

Central African Republic

Chad.

China

Colombia

Costa Rica_

Cuba___

Cyprus.

Dahomey

Denmark...

Dominican Republic

Ecuador.

El Salvador_

Finland.

Gabon.

Germany, Federal Republic of

Ghana_

Greece-.

Guatemala___

Guinea

Guyana

Haiti.

Honduras

Iceland.

Iran__.

Iraq

Ratifications
Registered

May 16, 1963

January 18, 1960
June 7, 1960

March 5, 1958
January 23, 1961
June 18, 1965
March 11, 1963 *
September 3, 1962

July 14, 1959
June 9, 1964

June 8, 1961

March 31, 1959
June 7, 1963

May 4, 1959

June 2, 1958

September 23, 1960

May 22, 1961

January 17, 1958

June 23, 1958

February 5, 1962

November 18, 1958

May 27, 1960

May 29, 1961

June 22, 1959
December 15, 1958
March 30, 1962
December 9, 1959

July 11, 1961
June 8, 1966 *

March 4, 1958

August 4, 1958

November 29, 1960

April 13, 1959

June 15, 1959

Ireland.

Israel.

Ivory Coast.

Jamaica__.
Jordan.

Kenya.

Kuwait

Liberia

Libya

Luxembourg

Malaya____

Mali..

Malta___.

Mexico.

Netherlands_

Niger

Nigeria -

See footnotes at end of table.

[blocks in formation]
[blocks in formation]

1 Confirmed for Malaysia and registered March 3, 1964.

Ratifications
Registered

April 14, 1958

February 15, 1960
May 16, 1966
December 6, 1960
November 17, 1960
July 30, 1958
November 23, 1959
September 18, 1962 *
July 28, 1961
June 13, 1961 *
October 25, 1965 *

November 18, 1960 *
December 8, 1961
June 2, 1958
July 18, 1958

October 30, 1961

January 30, 1962 * *

May 24, 1963 *
January 12, 1959
March 29, 1961

June 4, 1963

October 23, 1958

December 30, 1957

November 16, 1964

February 22, 1965

* Confirmed for United Republic of Tanganyika and Zanzibar and registered June 22, 1964.

Senator CLARK. With respect to the Convention on the Political Rights of Women, I note there are 51 countries which have ratified, and I ask consent that that list may also be printed in the record. Senator DODD. It will also be included, without objection. (The document referred to follows:)

Afghanistan_.
Albania.

Argentina....

Belgium..

Brazil.

Bulgaria.

CONVENTION ON THE POLITICAL RIGHTS OF WOMEN

Byelorussian SSR.
Canada_-_-

SIGNED AT NEW YORK MARCH 31, 1953

Central African Republic.

China...

Congo (Brazzaville)
Cuba...

Czechoslovakia___

Denmark..

Dominican Republic_

Enador--.

Finland....

See footnote at end of table.

Date of Receipt of Instru-
ment of Ratification or
Accession (a)

November 16, 1966 (a)
May 12, 1955 (a)
February 27, 1961
May 20, 1964 (a)
August 13, 1963
March 17, 1954 (a)
August 11, 1954
January 30, 1957 (a)
September 4, 1962 *

December 21, 1953

October 15, 1962 *

April 8, 1954

April 6, 1955

July 7, 1954

December 11, 1953

April 23, 1954
October 6, 1958 (a)

« السابقةمتابعة »