The Administration of Mandates by the British Dominions

1934 ◽  
Vol 28 (2) ◽  
pp. 287-302 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lucretia L. Ilsley
Keyword(s):  
South Africa ◽  
New Zealand ◽  
West Africa ◽  
British Empire ◽  
New Guinea ◽  
League Of Nations ◽  
South West ◽  
Large Island ◽  
Western Samoa ◽  
South West Africa

The former German colonies occupied by the Dominions in 1914 were entrusted to them, as mandatories under the League of Nations, at the Peace Conference of 1919. Of these territories, administered as C mandates since December, 1920, three are located in the South Seas. Western Samoa, now a mandate1 of New Zealand, is the larger part of a small group of islands; New Guinea, a mandate of Australia, consists of the northwestern portion of the large island of New Guinea and numerous smaller islands; while Nauru, a British Empire mandate administered by Australia, is a tiny phosphate island. The fourth Dominion mandate, South-West Africa, is a large and somewhat arid territory adjoining the Union of South Africa, which acts as mandatory.

International Court of Justice

1961 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
pp. 184-187 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
South Africa ◽  
West Africa ◽  
League Of Nations ◽  
Annual Reports ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
South West ◽  
International Court ◽  
South West Africa ◽  
And Performance ◽  
International Status

South West Africa Cases (Ethiopia v. Union of South Africa and Liberia v. Union of South Africa): On November 4, 1960, applications were filed in the Registry of the Court by Ethiopia and Liberia, instituting separate proceedings against the Union of South Africa. Both applications concerned the mandate for South West Africa and the duties and performance of the Union, as mandatory, thereunder. The applicants alleged that the Union, acting through official bodies created by it to administer the territory, had violated, and was continuing to violate, Article 2 of the mandate and Article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations by: 1) arbitrary and unreasonable legislation; 2) the suppression of rights and liberties essential to the orderly evolution of the inhabitants toward self-government; 3) the failure to render annual reports concerning the territory to the General Assembly of the UN; and 4) the exercise of administrative and legislative powers inconsistent with the international status of the territory. The applications contended that the Union of South Africa had thereby modified substantially the terms of the mandate without the consent of the UN, and sought declarations by the Court in accordance with their allegations.

The Africa Bureau, London

1964 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 292-294
Author(s):  
Peter Calvocoressi
Keyword(s):  
South Africa ◽  
West Africa ◽  
United Nations ◽  
Accurate Information ◽  
Physical Size ◽  
Informal Group ◽  
The Past ◽  
African People ◽  
South West ◽  
South West Africa

It is not easy to describe the objects, still less the activities, of the Africa Bureau in a few words. It is one of those organisations whose ambitions and influence are much greater than its physical size.If you look at the dominating purpose behind the activities of the past 12 years, you will find it in the Bureau's sympathy with and determination to promote African independence. It was established in 1952 to provide accurate information particularly on the aims and hopes of African nationalism, to oppose unfair discrimination, and to encourage development in Africa. The need for such an organisation in Britain had been recognised primarily by Rev. Michael Scott, who on returning from South Africa sought help from people in Britain for the African people of South West Africa. An informal group advising on the intricate political and constitutional issues involved in bringing South West Africa's plight before the United Nations provided the nucleus from which the Africa Bureau grew, and since 1948, Michael Scott, honorary director of the Bureau, has attended the U.N. and given evidence as personal representative of Chief Hosea Kutako of the Hereros.

The Origins of the South West Africa Dispute: The Versailles Peace Conference and the Creation of the Mandates System

1968 ◽  
Vol 6 ◽  
pp. 115-143
Author(s):  
S. Slonim
Keyword(s):  
World War I ◽  
West Africa ◽  
League Of Nations ◽  
World War ◽  
The South ◽  
South West ◽  
Tiered System ◽  
South West Africa ◽  
Sliding Scale ◽  
The Creation

The roots of the South West Africa dispute relate back to the events that took place at the end of World War I and led to the creation of the League of Nations mandates system. More particularly, the conflict between the United Nations and South Africa cannot be understood except by tracing the manner in which South West Africa became a part of that system. The “great compromise” hammered out by President Wilson and the Dominion ministers at the Paris Peace Conference in 1919 produced a three-tiered system of mandates which reflected in a sliding scale a varied balancing of national and international interests. The result of the compromise was a divergency of interpretation that has endured to this day and in considerable measure has fostered and sustained the dispute in its present-day dimensions.

General Assembly

1955 ◽  
Vol 9 (4) ◽  
pp. 502-512
Keyword(s):  
South Africa ◽  
West Africa ◽  
General Assembly ◽  
International Commitments ◽  
South West ◽  
Rules Of Procedure ◽  
South West Africa ◽  
The Government ◽  
Alternate Procedure ◽  
Union Government

Report of the Committee on South West Africa: The report of the Committee on South West Africa to the tenth session of the General Assembly stated that the Committee had again invited the government of the Union of South Africa to confer with it, but that the Union government had refused the invitation, stating that it still maintained that the mandate in respect of South West Africa had lapsed and that the government had no other international commitments as a result of the demise of the League of Nations. Provisional rules of procedure for the Committee had been adopted on February 11, 1954; at its meeting on June 1, 1955, the Committee, having received no comment from South Africa, decided that these provisional rules of procedure should become its rules of procedure. In 1955, the Union government had again refused to submit an annual report in regard to the Territory of South West Africa to the Committee; therefore, the Committee decided to apply the alternate procedure contained in its rules of procedure with respect to examination of reports.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document