65 



During seven informal consultation meet inns, each of the 

 various entities was discussed in detail. There emerged 

 from these consultations two criteria (same as those in the 

 informal plenaries — legal competence in LOS subject matters 

 and treaty-making capacity with regard to such matters) which 

 should be applied as a test to determine whether a non-State 

 entity cold participate in the Convention. Some expressed 

 the view that these criteria should not be strictly applied 

 and that other factors should be taken into account. 



In applying these criteria to self-governing associated 

 States (as described in the Philippines/Solomon Islands pro- 

 posal: informal document FC/19), it was found that they 

 would satisfy the two criteria. In this regard, a strong 

 case was made that the Cook Islands, Niue and the associated 

 States that may emerge in the TTPI would satisfy both criteria. 



Because of variations with respect to territories which 

 have not attained full independence in accordance with UNGA 

 resolution 1514 (XV), discussions revealed that: 



1) Participation cannot be allowed to all dependent 

 territories as a class; 



2) Disputed territories and those to which the transi- 

 tional provision applies should be deferred for the moment; 

 and 



: 3) Some territories, which have achieved significant 

 autonomy, can satisfy both criteria. 



With respect to national liberation movements, some dele- 

 gations suggested that these groups had the potential to ful- 

 fill the criteria even though they could not presently do so, 

 arguing that other criteria should be applied to them. Other 

 delegations questioned the application of these criteria to 

 these groups. The Arab Group States and others tried to 

 ascribe legal competence and legal personality to the PLO by 

 describing a growing jurisprudence with regard to them (i.e., 

 certain degree of recognition by States, the United Nations 

 and regional organizations; establishment of diplomatic mis- 

 sions in several States in accordance with the Vienna Conven- 

 vention on Diplomatic Relations; and signature, though on a 

 separate page, of the Final Act of the Diplomatic Conference 

 on the Reaffirmation and Development of International Humani- 

 tarian Law Applicable in Armed Conflict). However, there 

 was no consensus that the two criteria applied to the PLO or 

 other national liberation movements. 



Because of the many questions regarding participation by 

 organizations (outlined above at the informal plenary) , the 



