CAB129-52 — Page 111

Page 111

Printed for the Cabinet. June 1952

CONFIDENTIAL

C. (52) 191

CABINET OFFICE RECORD COPY

Copy No.

76

12th June, 1952

CABINET

PRIVILEGES AND IMMUNITIES FOR INTERNATIONAL

ORGANISATIONS

MEMORANDUM BY THE SECRETARY OF STATE FOR FOREIGN AFFAIRS

Every Order in Council conferring immunities and privileges upon an inter- national organisation must be approved by an affirmative resolution of both Houses of Parliament (International Organisations (Immunities and Privileges) Act, 1950). At the present time Orders in Council are ready for presentation or are in preparation in respect of a number of international organisations (see Annex III). Several relate to Specialised Agencies of the United Nations.

2. I am now asking my colleagues to consider whether these draft orders should be submitted to Parliament for approval. The subject is admittedly an awkward one. Parliament is traditionally disinclined to grant special facilities in the United Kingdom to persons whether foreigners or British subjects, just because they happen to work in an international organisation of which Her Majesty's Government is a member. The House of Lords has been particularly critical, and ex-Lord Chancellors and others have expressed concern at the extension of diplo- matic or lesser forms of privilege or immunity to an ever-widening class of persons. Any privilege or immunity granted to these individuals must, it is said, be granted at the expense of persons whom they wrong. Any extension has, therefore, been represented as a deprivation of the rights of ordinary citizens and as conflicting with the general principles of equality before the law and with the observance of the rule of the law. In October 1950 a draft Order relating to the Universal Postal Union (U.P.U.) was withdrawn by His Majesty's Government after discussion in the House of Lords. With regard to this organisation, it was claimed that as the Union had operated successfully for some seventy-five years without any special grant of privileges or immunities none were needed now. While recognising the force of these arguments, I consider that they are more theoretical than practical, and I am convinced that there is a strong case for proceeding with the Orders for the following

reasons.

3. Her Majesty's Government have taken a prominent part in international negotiations for the setting up of the organisations in question and have consistently advocated, with some measure of success, that the minimum of privileges should be recommended for these organisations consistent with their efficient operation. If we refuse to take the necessary legislative action in the United Kingdom to grant privileges to the particular organisations now in question we should be departing from a policy which has been consistently followed since the war. It would in my view be difficult to defend or explain such a change of policy and other countries would regard any grounds which we could adduce as trivial. Particularly would this be so

42396

Page 111

B

Page 111

133