Namibia

HC Deb 02 August 1971 vol 822 cc1079-81

15. Mr. Judd

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what representations he has now received from the South African Government concerning the advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice on Namibia; and what reply he has sent.

Mr. Godber

On 28th July the South African Government conveyed to Her Majesty's Government an Aide-Mémoire on the Advisory Opinion of the International Court of Justice on South-West Africa. This is now being studied.

Mr. Judd

Does the right hon. Gentleman accept that there is growing frustration at the inordinate delay on the part of the Government in making their view of the advisory opinion of the International Court known? Can he give a categorical assurance that before we go into recess we can expect a clear statement from the Government accepting the opinion and the implications that flow from it?

Mr. Godber

That supplementary question really does not follow from the Question on the Order Paper. However, there are specific Questions on that subject, and I must reserve my reply until we reach them.

23. Mr. Peter Archer

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs whether he has yet completed his study of the findings of the International Court of Justice on South-West Africa; and if he will make a statement.

46. Mr. Alexander W. Lyon

asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what action Her Majesty's Government now propose to take on the judgement of the International Court on Namibia.

Mr. Godber

I am not yet in a position to add to what my right hon. Friend told the House on 12th July. I must ask hon. Members to await completion of the Government's study of the Court's Opinion.—[Vol. 821, c. 22–3, 8.]

Mr. Archer

What, about the Opinion, is less than clear? Does the right hon. Gentleman not appreciate that prior to the Opinion the United Kingdom was diplomatically isolated over this but arguably right in law, whereas since the Opinion it is diplomatically isolated and manifestly wrong in law?

Mr. Godber

I could not accept that generalisation. This is an extremely complicated issue, and the Government wish to have the fullest possible opportunity to study all aspects of it before reaching a decision.

Mr. Lyon

Is not the situation that the result of the Advisory Opinion of the Court makes Resolution 276 of 1970 mandatory and binding on this country? As a result, ought not this country to be considering ways in which it should withdraw from economic activities in Southwest Africa? If we are not to condone violence—as the Government say they will not do—to change Southern African policy and if we are not to fulfil our obligations under international law, what are we to do to change Southern African policy?

Mr. Godber

That question illustrates the danger of jumping to conclusions. It is quite wrong to assume that this resolution is mandatory. The hon. Gentleman will recognise that the arrangement to which he refers was entered into by a Government of which he was a member.