HL Deb 21 January 1965 vol 262 cc1015-8

3.35 p.m.

LORD BROCKWAY

My Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.

[The Question was as follows:

To ask Her Majesty's Government whether it is proposed to give evidence to the International Court at The Hague, when oral hearings commence on March 15, on the question of the fulfilment of the conditions of the Mandate for the administration of South-West Africa conferred by the League of Nations on His Britannic Majesty for and on behalf of the Government of the Union of South Africa].

LORD CHALFONT

No, my Lords. Her Majesty's Government do not consider that the United Kingdom has an interest in this case within the terms of Article 62 of the Statute of the Court, or that any useful purpose would be served by trying to intervene.

LORD BROCKWAY

My Lords, may I ask whether the Government will reconsider their decision on this matter, and whether they will pay some attention to the very weighty reasons for so doing which were given in the last Parliament by the present Solicitor General? Also, and in particular, will they bear in mind the following points: that the United Kingdom was a leading member of the League of Nations and took a prominent part in the establishment of the mandate system; that the terms of reference to the mandatory Power included progress towards self-government by the people, and social, educational and economic development; that the Government of the Republic of South Africa has applied to South-West Africa the system of apartheid, which all Parties in this country condemn; that special British responsibility lies in the fact that the Mandate was conferred on His Late Britannic Majesty and, through him, on the Government of the Union of South Africa; and, lastly—

THE LORD PRIVY SEAL (THE EARL OF LONGFORD)

My Lords, I am afraid I must ask my noble friend to curtail his remarks a little as we are in Question Time.

LORD BROCKWAY

I was going to make my last point and I hope I may be—

THE EARL OF LONGFORD

I am afraid I must ask my noble friend to consider whether it would not be better to leave it where it is now. I am afraid I must put that point quite firmly.

LORD BROCKWAY

Then I shall put my last point as a supplementary question.

LORD CHALFONT

My Lords, the point that was raised by the noble Lord about the League of Nations and Britain's membership of the League of Nations is not entirely relevant to this issue because the two parties to the Mandate were the League of Nations and the mandatory Power, the Union of South Africa; and, while the noble Lord is right in saying that His Late Britannic Majesty accepted the Mandate, he accepted it on behalf of the Union of South Africa. He was acting, not on behalf of the Government of the United Kingdom but as Head of State of South Africa, which was then a fully independent member of the Commonwealth.

LORD BROCKWAY

May I ask the noble Lord whether the Government will consider the further point that, when this Mandate was conferred, there was no anticipation that the present policy of educational, social and economic segregation would be applied in South-West Africa, including the confiscation of rich land for the exclusive use of the white population?

LORD CHALFONT

While taking into account the points raised by the noble Lord, I must say again that Her Majesty's Government have been notified of this dispute under Article 40, and that we therefore have no right to intervene in this dispute.

THE EARL OF DUNDEE

My Lords, will the Government carefully watch the manner in which the United Nations interpret the recent judgment of the International Court, declaring that countries belonging to the United Nations are obliged to subscribe to the Congo and other special forces, and that those countries which do not pay up forfeit their vote in the Assembly, so that we may have some criterion for judging the sincerity with which the United Nations applies future judgments of the International Court?

LORD CHALFONT

My Lords, Her Majesty's Government, as has been made clear by the noble Lord, Lord Caradon, at the United Nations, do indeed very firmly and very sincerely support the principle of Article 19.

LORD MILVERTON

My Lords, may I ask one supplementary question? Apart from the fact that it seems strange that, in the wording of this Question, it is taken for granted that the United Nations is the heir of the League of Nations, it is also taken for granted that the Union of South Africa is not, apparently, the heir to the responsibilities, such as they may have been, which were at that time undertaken by His Late Britannic Majesty. But, apart from the guilelessness of that conclusion, may I ask whether it is in order in this House, under the guise of a Question, to make statements such as the noble Lord, Lord Brockway, has made, detrimental to the Administration of the Union of South Africa, which statements have no relation whatever to this Question and which, incidentally, happen to be totally untrue?

THE EARL OF LONGFORD

My Lords, perhaps I could deal with the last point. I think I made it plain by my intervention that I was rather worried by the form of the questions put by my noble friend, and I do not think I need add anything to that.