69

This compromise draft did not, however, gain the support of the Soviet Union representative, who maintained his view that it was improper for the Assembly to express an opinion on the fitness of individual States for membership. The Soviet Union delegation were studying the information made available to them by the representative of Ceylon, and would give their views when the application was discussed in the Security Council. In the meantime, having voted for the reconsideration of all applications, they would take no part in this " political game," the object of which was to discriminate against certain States. The Soviet Union, therefore, while they proposed to vote against the resolution, did not consider the vote as in any way prejudging Ceylon's case. The Polish representative, '.' in view of the remarks of the representative of the Soviet Union," withdrew the support he had expressed a few minutes before for the compromise resolution. The Australian representative thereupon reverted to his original resolution, which was adopted by 38 votes (N.Z.) to 6 with 6 abstentions. When this subject came before the Assembly, the representative of Belgium proposed that the resolution his delegation had originally submitted be withdrawn. When this was objected to, he announced he would vote against it. The resolution was rejected by 11 votes in favour, 15 (N.Z.) against, witli 17 abstentions. The delegations of Australia, Burma, India, Pakistan, and the Philippines jointly presented amendments to the resolution on Ceylon which had the effect of reverting to the text agreed on by the subcommittee. No votes were registered against these amendments, but the Slav bloc voted against the amended resolution as a whole. The texts of the resolutions adopted by the Assembly are as follows : Advisory Opinion of the International Court of Justice " Whereas, pursuant to the provisions of Article 4, paragraph 2, of the Charter, admission to membership in the United Nations will be effected by a decision of the General Assembly upon the recommendation of the Security Council, and : ' Whereas the International Court of Justice in an advisory opinion of 28 May, 1948, declared that: " (a) A member of the United Nations which is called upon, in virtue of Article 4 of the Charter, to pronounce itself by its vote, either in the Security Council or in the General Assembly, on the admission of a State to membership in the United Nations, is not juridically entitled to make its consent to the admission dependent on conditions not expressly provided by paragraph 1 of the said Article ; and " (b) In particular, a member of the Organization cannot, while it recognizes the conditions set forth in that provision to be fulfilled by the State concerned, subject its affirmative vote to the additional condition that other States be admitted to membership in the United Nations together with that state ;