.jpg)
Salient. An Organ of Student Opinion at Victoria College, Wellington, N.Z. Vol. 14, No. 5. May 24, 1951
Objections Disposed: II
Objections Disposed: II
| "1. | Each member of the Security Council shall have one vote. |
| "2. | Decisions of the Security Council on procedural matters shall be made by an affirmative vote of seven members. |
| "3. | Decisions of the Security Council on all other matters shall be made by an affirmative vote of seven members including the concurring votes of the permanent members; provided that, in decisions under Chapter VI, and under paragraph 3 of Article 52, a party to a dispute shall abstain from voting." |
Now, as Dr. Alberto I. Alvarez, of Cuba, pointed out to the Security Council very early in the game (July 7), "the Soviet Union had itself accepted the position on many occasions that the abstention of a permanent member docs not constitute a veto." The precedent was well established.
As early as August 1, 1947, when the 173rd meeting of the Security Council was dealing with the Indonesian question, the President of the Council was able to state: "It is now jurisprudence in the Security Council—and the interpretation accepted for a long time—that an abstention is not considered a veto, and the concurrent votes of the permanent members mean the votes of the permanent members who participate in the voting. Those who abstain intentionally are not considered to have cast a veto."
On that occasion, one paragraph of the first resolution was adopted by a vote of 7 members, including the concurring votes of only two permanent members, 3 permanent members abstaining; another paragraph was adopted by a vote of eight members, including the concurring votes of three permanent members, two permanent members abstaining. (Official Records of the Security Council, 2nd Year, No. 68 pp. 1700, 1703, 1711-12). As far as I can ascertain, the ruling was not challenged at the time.