3
which the work of the Security Council would become very difficult; item 7, concerning recommendations to the General Assembly regarding the appointment of the Secretary-General; item 8, concerning the adoption of the directive to the Military Staff Committee to meet at a given place and date; and item 11, concerning the reception and consideration of reports and recommendations from the General Assembly, an item which may cover many matters.
The Preparatory Commission adopted, without alterations, the provisional agenda as drafted by the Executive Committee, except with respect to item 13. This item, relating to the election of the members of the International Court of Justice, was placed last on the provisional agenda so that an opportunity might be given to prepare for the election.
Regarding the directive to the Military Staff Committee, I would point out that it is necessary to fix the date and place of the first meeting of the representatives of the five States who are to form the Military Staff Committee. The Preparatory Commission left it to the Council itself to decide upon this date and place.
The provisional rules of procedure were the subject of searching discussion in Committee 2 of the Preparatory Commission. In particular, the following three questions engaged the attention of representatives who took part in the drafting of these rules: languages, access to the records of private meetings of the Security Council, and the explanatory notes to be appended to the provisional rules of procedure.
As regards languages,[1] the Preparatory Commission felt that this was a matter for the Security Council itself to decide. The suggestion was made, however, that unless the Security Council decided otherwise, it might be willing to accept the provision that the rules adopted at the San Francisco Conference be applied. The Security Council should take note of the discussion which took place on this subject, and should decide whether any changes in the rules adopted at the San Francisco Conference are called for.
As regards the question of access to the records of private meetings of the Security Council, rule 31 (which is now rule 24) was amended by omission of its last sentence. This read as follows:
"Representatives of members who have taken part in the meeting shall have the right at all times to consult the records at the Secretariat."
By omitting this passage, the Preparatory Commission wished to stress the opinion that the Security Council should also define for itself the right of consulting the records of private meetings.
The Preparatory Commission in like manner rejected the various proposals[2] designed to provide commentaries on the provisional rules of
