inhabitants of these territories are paramount, and accept as a sacred trust the obligation to promote to the utmost, within the system of international peace and security established by the present Charter, the well-being of the inhabitants of these territories, and, to this end:

a. to ensure, with due respect for the culture of the peoples concerned, their political, economic, social, and educational advancement, their just treatment, and their protection against abuses;

b. to develop self-government, to take due account of the political aspirations of the peoples, and to assist them in the progressive development of their free political institutions, according to the particular circumstances of each territory and its peoples and their varying stages of advancement;

c. to further international peace and security;

d. to promote constructive measures of development, to encourage research, and to cooperate with one another and, when and where appropriate, with specialized international bodies with a view to the practical achievement of the social, economic, and scientific purposes set forth in this Article; and

e. to transmit regularly to the Secretary-General for information purposes, subject to such limitation as security and constitutional considerations may require, statistical and other information of a technical nature relating to economic, social, and educational conditions in the territories for which they are respectively responsible other than those territories to which Chapters XII and XIII apply.

Jurisdiction of Courts

U.S. District Court Appellate Jurisdiction in Guam

In a 5 to 4 decision in the case of the Territory of Guam v. Olsen, 45 Law Week 4469, decided May 23, 1977, the U.S. Supreme Court held that section 22 of the 1950 Organic Act of Guam (Act) providing that the District Court of Guam "shall have such appellate jurisdiction as the [Guam] Legislature may determine" does not permit the Guam Legislature to transfer the U.S. District Court's appellate jurisdiction to hear appeals from local Guam courts to the newly created Supreme Court of Guam, though the Guam legislature does have the power under the Act to "determine" what should constitute appealable cases to the U.S. District Court. Id.

The majority opinion, written by Mr. Justice Brennan, placed emphasis on the following portions of the Organic Act, Pub. L. No. 630, c. 512, § 22, 64 Stat. 384, 389-390 (1950), 48 U.S.C. 1424 (a), which "before an amendment not relevant here, provided:"

There is hereby created a court of record to be designated the "District Court of Guam," and the judicial authority of Guam shall be vested in the District Court of Guam and in such court or courts as may have been or may hereafter be established by the laws of Guam. The District Court of Guam shall have, in all causes arising under the laws of the United States, the jurisdiction of a district court of the United States as such court is defined in section 451 of title 28, United States Code, and shall have original jurisdiction in all other causes in Guam, jurisdiction over which has not been transferred by the legislature to other court or courts established by it, and shall have such appellate jurisdiction as the legislature may determine. The jurisdiction of and the procedure in the courts of

Guam other than the District Court of Guam shall be prescribed by the laws of Guam. (Footnote omitted.)

Id. 4470.

The majority opinion noted that the purpose of the Guam Legislature in adopting the Court Reorganization Act of 1974, Guam Pub. L. 12–85 (1974), was to abolish certain local courts with cases appealable to the U.S. District Court and to give to the Guam Superior Court original jurisdiction in the following cases:

... [A]ll cases arising under the laws of Guam, civil or criminal, in law or equity, regardless of the amount in controversy, except for causes arising under the Constitution, treaties, laws of the United States and any matter involving the Guam Territorial Income Tax. (Footnote omitted.)

Id. 4470.

The Court Reorganization Act of 1974 also transferred the appellate jurisdiction previously exercised by the U.S. District Court over cases appealable from the local courts to the Supreme Court of Guam. The procedural context of the case at bar was described as follows:

Respondent was convicted of criminal charges in the Superior Court, and appealed to the District Court of Guam. The District Court dismissed the appeal on the authority of a divided panel decision of the Court of Appeals of the Ninth Circuit holding that the 1974 Court Reorganization Act validly divested the District Court of its appellate jurisdiction and transferred that jurisdiction to the newly created Supreme Court. Agana Bay Devel. Co. Ltd. v. Sup. Ct. of Guam, 529 F. 2d 952 (1976). In this case, however, the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit overruled en banc the panel decision in Agana Bay, and reversed the dismissal of respondent's appeal. 540 F. 2d 1011 (1976). The Court of Appeals held that "the appellate jurisdiction of the district court may not be transferred without congressional authorization and pursuant to such provisions and safeguards as Congress may provide." Id., at 1012. ... (Footnotes omitted.)

Id. 4470.

The Court interpreted section 22 to permit a "transfer" by the Guam Legislature of original jurisdiction from the U.S. District Court to local courts without permitting a like transfer of the U.S. District Court's appellate jurisdiction to the Supreme Court of Guam:

.. The Act expressly provides that original jurisdiction might be "transferred" to "other court or courts" created by the legislature. As to appellate jurisdiction, however, the wording is that the District Court "shall have such appellate jurisdiction as the legislature may determine." The question immediately arises why, if Congress

contemplated authority to eliminate the District Court's appellate jurisdiction by transferring it to a local court, Congress did not, as in the case of "original jurisdiction," explicitly provide that appellate jurisdiction too might be "transferred." Moreover, if Congress contemplated such a broad grant of authority, it might be expected that it would have referred, as in the case of original jurisdiction, to "other court or courts" that would be established to assume the appellate jurisdiction transferred from the District Court. Clearly, the word "determine" is not used as a synonym for "transfer," and it is not obvious that the power to "determine" the appellate jurisdiction of the District Court includes the power to abolish it by "transfer" to another court. . . . [W]e note that the Guam Legislature found no broader authority in the term for the 23 years from 1951 to 1974. We therefore conclude that Congress expressly authorized a "transfer" of the District Court's original jurisdiction but withheld a like power respecting the court's appellate jurisdiction, empowering Guam to "determine" the District Court's appellate jurisdiction only in the sense of the selection of what should constitute appealable causes. (Footnote omitted.)

45 Law Week 4471.

The opinion also expressed the Court's reluctance to permit the Guam Legislature to foreclose appellate review "of decisions of territorial courts in cases that may turn on questions of Federal law" by courts created pursuant to Article III of the U.S. Constitution, including the U.S. Supreme Court, "without a clear signal from Congress." Id.

American Samoa

Local Self-Government

On June 20, 1977, John Kriendler, political adviser to the U.S. Permanent Representative to the United Nations, made a statement concerning American Samoa in the Sub-Committee on Small Territories of the U.N. Committee of Twenty-four on Decolonization. Mr. Kriendler described the degree of self-government being exercised by the people of American Samoa and the relationship of the territory to the U.S. Federal Government in the following terms:

I would like to respond to the concerns raised by members of the Committee on June 15 regarding American Samoa.

The Committee is already well informed regarding the decision of the people of the territory to elect their own Governor and Lieutenant Governor. The Committee is also aware that steps have been taken by the local legislature (the Fono) and by the United States to implement this decision. An entirely separate matter of which you are also aware, and which has apparently caused some uncertainty, is recent talk of the United States approving an organic act for the territory. I will discuss each of these matters separately.

Before going into detail on these questions, I think it is important to remind the Committee that these factors relate to the degree of self-government to be exercised by the people of American Samoa and the relationship of the territory to the Federal Government. They will not alter the fundamental fact that American Samoa is a United States territory and has been in fact since the turn of the century.

The election of a governor will provide the people of the territory with greater self-government in accordance with their wishes than they now have. This step is fully in accordance with article 73 (b) of the Charter which calls on members of the United Nations who administer non-self-governing territories to "develop self-government, to take due account of the political aspirations of the peoples, and to assist them in progressive development of their free political institutions, according to the particular circumstances of each territory and its peoples and their varying stages of advancement."

I might add in this regard that article 73 (e) speaks of an obligation to transmit to the Secretary-General certain information of a statistical and technical nature relating to economic, social and educational conditions in non-self-governing territories. It does not refer to any obligation to transmit information relating to political and constitutional developments, but we provide that information because of our wish to cooperate with the Committee. We are aware of the desire of this Committee to send a visiting mission to American Samoa and have the matter under consideration, but I would remind the Committee that there is no obligation under the Charter to extend such an invitation either to observe conditions in the territories or to observe particular steps in the process of achievement of local self-government.

My Government has provided the Committee with information regarding last year's referendum and the Secretariat working paper deals with the question in some detail. As the Committee is aware, ballots were cast by 4,451 individuals. This figure represents approximately 64 percent of the registered voters, who number 6,933.

The total census figure of approximately 30,000 inhabitants in American Samoa is somewhat misleading as a guide to judging the size of the electorate, in that only approximately half are 18 years of age or older. Of that figure approximately 7,000 are aliens, including a large number of Western Samoans, who have not yet acquired residence and are not entitled to vote. We estimate that there are roughly 8,000 American Samoans over the age of 18 who reside in American Samoa.

As we have discussed with the Committee before, previous referenda were held on the question of an elected Governor in 1972, 1974, and 1975. In each case the referenda were subjected to criticism on the grounds that the issue was not clearly defined for the voters, either because there were other questions on the ballot or because the referendum was not preceded by an objective political education campaign, explaining the issue to the voters. Great care was taken this time to ensure that these criticisms could not be fairly leveled and that the referendum would in fact reflect the freely expressed views of the people of American Samoa.

The election of a governor, as I have already stated, will provide the people of the territory with a greater degree of self-government than now obtains. The full extent of the powers and responsibilities of the governor will be spelled out in a Secretarial Order to be promulgated by the Secretary of the Interior in the coming months. That order will be consistent with the provisions of the Elected Governor Act of 1977, recently passed by the Fono. The relationship of the elected governor with the Federal Government and the degree of autonomy with which he will operate will also be spelled out in the Secretarial Order. . . .

*

The organization of the Government of American Samoa is distinct from that of the United States Virgin Islands and Guam, in that the United States Congress has never enacted an organic act for American Samoa. An organic act is legislation passed by the Congress for the purpose of organizing a local government, providing for self-governing institutions and spelling out the relationship of the territory to the Federal Government. As I have said, this has occurred for Guam and the U.S. Virgin Islands. In the case of American Samoa, the Congress has delegated to the executive branch responsibility for developing the institutions of government and spelling out the precise relationship with the Federal Government. There is no immediate prospect of the Congress approving an organic act for American Samoa, and as we have informed the Committee previously, there is little support among the people of American Samoa for consideration by the Congress of an organic act, because it is felt that it could jeopardize traditional land holding patterns.

Before closing, I will turn briefly to the economy. I am pleased to report that the Federal Government and the Government of American Samoa have had considerable success in their efforts to increase local revenue collection and reduce reliance on the annual federal grant. Efforts to expand the tax base are reflected in the increase of local revenue collections from $3,931,000 in FY [Fiscal Year] 1976 to an estimated $8,713,000 in FY [Fiscal Year] 1978. Grant assistance is decreasing in proportion, as the total annual budget remains nearly constant at approximately $30,000,000.

Press Release USUN-51 (77), June 21, 1977.

On Sept. 13, 1977, Acting Secretary of the Interior James A. Joseph signed Order No. 3009, which provided for the election of the Governor and Lieutenant Governor of American Samoa and for the creation of the Office of Government Comptroller. Portions of the Order appear below:

Sec. 1 Purpose. The purpose of this order is to provide for an elected Governor and Lieutenant Governor in American Samoa and to create the Government Comptroller for American Samoa in the Office of the Secretary of Interior. The electorate of American Samoa in an official referendum of August 31, 1976, voted by 3044 affirmative votes to 1366 negative votes to