FREE TERRITORY OF TRIESTE

Press, Volume LXXXII, Issue 24985, 20 September 1946, Page 7

FREE TERRITORY OF TRIESTE

PARIS CONFERENCE DISCUSSION

DISPUTE ABOUT POWERS

OF. GOVERNOR iN.Z. Presa Amodation—Copyi

(Rec. 8 pun.) PARIS, Sept 18. Resuming general discussion of the boundaries or the proposed free territory of Trieste, Mr Kissilev (White Russia), at a meeting of the Italian political and territorial commission of the Paris Conference, argued that the Trieste suburbs were historically part of Slovene territory, were the best outlet to the sea for Jugoslavia and othe? nations, and should be restored to close relations with the country to which they belonged. The Slovene people, he said, appealed to the conference for the rights of small peoples. He added that it would be legitimate and just if the conference decided to give the Trieste suburbs to Jugoslavia. The Trieste sub-committee broached the issue of the governor’s powers in the free territory of Trieste, on which the Big Four did not agree. Differences arose over the question of initiative in putting forward legislation.

Mr Piyade (Jugoslavia) complained that the American draft for the statute laying down Trieste’s form of government gave the governor dictatorial powers. Mr Sterndale Bennett (Britain) supported the American view that the governor should have the right to initiate legislation in matters affecting his responsibility to the Security Council.

Mr Wilfrom (France) said that the French draft statute gave the governor even wider powers of initiative than the American draft, because they thought in terms of a French governor who presided over the government of a territory. Mr Bebler (Jugoslavia) said that the Jugoslavs regarded the power of the governor as taking away the democratic power of the people. Mr Vyshinsky (Russia) supported the Jugoslav proposal to call the governor a high commissioner. He agreed that the governor should be the representative of the Security Council, but as such he should not participate in legislation and should not possess executive authority. The Security Council’s functions relatingto Trieste were to ensure the territory’s integrity, not to govern it, consequently the governor’s functions, should be similarly restricted. The governor could not have executive and legislative -authority, because if he had he would be responsible to the legitimate authority in the territory—the Assembly—and he could be dismissed by the Assembly. Mr Vyshinsky added that even the restricted rights of initiative with which the governor would be invested under the British and American grafts did not accord with • the Council of Foreign Ministers’ proposals. The sub-committee adjourned. The Bulgarian Committee has completed all its work except the decision on the British proposal to protect the rights of Jews.