Preface:  The relations between the Northern Mariana Islands and the United States are governed by the Covenant to Establish a Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands in Political Union with the United States of America.  Section 902 of the Covenant provides for regular, good-faith consultations between Special Representatives appointed by the President of the United States and by the Governor of the Northern Mariana Islands on all matters affecting the relationship between the two governments. The Special Representatives of the Governor offered the position paper below in late 1986, shortly after President Reagan announced termination of the United Nations trusteeship under which the Northern Marianas had been administered by the United States.  

The position paper urged adoption of language affirming the right of local self-government of the Northern Marianas.  The language was intended to be included in a joint report by the Special Representatives to the President and the Governor.  No agreement was ever reached on language for a joint report on the subject and no report was prepared.

The position paper was published in the Compilation of Documents from the First and Second Rounds of the Covenant Section 902 Consultations (1986).  Only limited copies of that Compilation were made, and it seems to me the position paper merits wider distribution.

I was counsel to the Special Representatives of the Governor at that time, and assisted in the preparation of this paper. 

The page numbers of the original document have been inserted at the beginning of each page in brackets, thus: [3] 

Position Paper

By

The Special Representatives of the Governor of the

Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands

For the Section 902 Consultations

on

SELF-GOVERNMENT

A brief history of Federal control of local government in the Northern Mariana Islands

Before approval of the Covenant

The Covenant provisions

Protection of the right of the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands to local self-government is necessary to accommodate the principles of representative democracy to the especial situation of the Northern Mariana Islands, which does not participate in the national political process

The United States is bound by the Covenant to honor its pledge to allow the Northern Mariana Islands the right to local self-government

A decent respect for international law and the opinions of the community of nations requires that the United States adhere to its Covenant pledge of local self-government for the Northern Mariana Islands

The right of the Northern Mariana Islands to local self-government is not limited by the grant of sovereignty to the United States in Section 101 of the Covenant

Protection of the Commonwealth's right to local self-government is consistent with the pronounced policy of President Reagan

[1]Position Paper

By

The Special Representatives of the Governor of the

Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands

For the Section 902 Consultations

on

SELF-GOVERNMENT

INTRODUCTION

The Special Representatives of the Governor of the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands have designated adherence to the Covenant pledge of self-government for the Northern Mariana Islands as an issue affecting the relationship between the Northern Mariana Islands and the United States to be discussed in the Section 902 Consultations. In their "Desig-[2]nation of Issues Affecting the Relationship between the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands and the United States of America," the Special Representatives of the Governor designated the issue of self-government in this language:

A cardinal feature of the Covenant that differentiates the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands from the territories and possessions of the United States is the guarantee of local self-government. In light of recent developments giving the United States Department of the Interior certain supervisory powers over the Northern Mariana Islands, the Northern Mariana Islands seeks reaffirmation of its fundamental right of local self-government, as guaranteed by the Covenant.

^{Top of page}

Return to Table of Contents

PROPOSED LANGUAGE FOR

REPORT OF THE SPECIAL REPRESENTATIVES

The Special Representatives of the Governor of the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands propose that the following language be incorporated in the Final Report of the Special Representatives.

The Special Representatives reaffirm that the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands has, pursuant to Sections 103 and 105 of the Covenant, a fundamental and irrevocable right to local self-government, a right that cannot be modified without the consent of the Commonwealth.

^{Top of page}

Return to Table of Contents

SUMMARY

The Covenant provides strong support for the view that the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands is intended to be something more than a territory or possession of the United States, that it is to enjoy greater rights of self-government than do those entities.

A significant feature of the Covenant is that the Department of the Interior, formerly having plenary authority over the Northern Mariana Islands, no longer was given any role in the government of the Northern Mariana Islands.

We cannot let significant inroads on the right of the Northern Mariana Islands to local self-government go unchallenged. Acquiescence in attempted limitations on this right, particularly acquiescence during consultations on "issues affecting the relationship between the Northern Mariana Islands [5] and the United States" will hamper the Commonwealth in challenging these limitations in the future and will affect the lives and freedoms of our children.

In general, and at a minimum, the right to local self-government of the Northern Mariana Islands should be regarded as at least equal to that of a State of the United States. Any intrusion into local matters by the Federal Government that would be regarded as violating the right of a State to local self-government should also be regarded as a violation of the right to local self-government guaranteed to the Commonwealth by Sections 103 and 105 of the Covenant.

^{Top of page}

Return to Table of Contents

WHY THE FINAL REPORT SHOULD REAFFIRM THE RIGHT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF THE NORTHERN MARIANA ISLANDS TO LOCAL SELF-GOVERNMENT

Before approval of the Covenant. Before enactment of United States Public Law 94-241, approving the Covenant, the Northern Mariana Islands--like the rest of the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands--was under the jurisdiction of the United States Department of the Interior. Section 1681(a) of title 48 of the United States Code, enacted in 1954, provides that

Until Congress shall further provide for the government of the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands, all executive, legislative, and judicial authority necessary for the civil administration of the Trust Territory shall continue to be vested in such person or [7] persons and shall be exercised in such manner and through such agency or agencies as the President of the United States may direct or authorize.

Pursuant to the authority granted by section 1681(a), the President conferred the responsibility of administering the Trust Territory on the Secretary of the Interior. Executive Order 11021, 3 C.F.R. 1959-63 Comp., at 600 (1962). The Trust Territory was administered by the Secretary through a series of Secretarial Orders, principally Secretarial Order 2918, as amended from time to time.

Section 1681 of title 48 vested absolute control over the entire Trust Territory in the President. Any self-government that was allowed was at the discretion of the President and his subordinates and could be withdrawn as easily as it was granted. Section 1681 "on its face . . . set up not a typical territorial government but a simple dictatorship." Porter v. United States, 496 F.2d 583, 592 (Ct. Cl. 1974) (Nichols, J., concurring), certiorari denied, 420 U.S. 1004 (1975).

[8] During the period that the Northern Mariana Islands was administered by the Department of the Interior as part of the Trust Territory, administrative agencies and the courts generally treated the governments of the Trust Territory and the other territories and possessions as governments independent of the federal government, even though each was completely controlled by the Federal Government. The reason for treating territorial governments as separate entities was simple: as separate entities, they were not subject to the administrative controls generally applicable to federal agencies.

As early as 1924, the Attorney General of the United States held that federal appropriations to the Virgin Islands were not subject to the detailed accounting requirements normal to federal appropriations because, once merged with local revenues, the federal monies take "the legal character of the revenues with which they are merged, and which are not subject to such detailed accounting." 34 Opinions of the Attorney General 217 (1924). In 1956 the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit held that, despite the appointment and payment of executive officials of the Government of the Virgin Islands by the Federal Government, those officials were officials of the Virgin Islands [9] and not of the United States and, accordingly, were not subject to federal tort liability for their negligent acts as they would have been if they had been considered federal officials. Harris v. Boreham, 233 F. 2d 110. An opinion of the Solicitor of the United States Department of the Interior in 1967 concluded that the Government of Guam, then under total federal control, was an "inchoate sovereign government" not bound by federal procurement regulations or a presidential directive requiring federal agencies to limit expenditures abroad. 74 Decisions of the U.S. Dep't of the Interior 366. Along the same line is the Micro Beach case, People of Saipan v. U.S. Department of Interior, 502 F.2d 90 (9th Cir. 1974, certiorari denied, 420 U.S. 1003 (1975), holding that, even though the High Commissioner was a federal official, because he was part of the separate Trust Territory Government, he was not subject to the procedures for environmental and administrative review to which federal officials are normally subject.

In general, then, before local self-determination began to be recognized in the territories of the United States and the Trust Territory, before those areas were governed by anyone other than federal officials, the principle had been well established [10] that the federal/territorial governments were free from most rules and regulations applicable to other federal agencies. In particular, federal funds used for the general support of territorial governments were treated as having lost their federal character and, therefore, not subject to the usual controls applicable to federal agencies. The Government of the Northern Mariana Islands, of course, is a successor to one of those federal/territorial governments, the Government of the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands. Under the principles of law previously established, federal funds used for the general support of the Commonwealth--Covenant funds-- should likewise not be subject to the normal federal controls. The imposition of federal controls on these funds at the very time self-government is allegedly being granted mocks that self-government.

^{Top of page}

Return to Table of Contents

The Covenant provisions. Section 1681 of title 48 of the United States Code specifically contemplated that Congress might subsequently alter the way in which the Trust Territory was to be governed. In enacting Public Law 94-241, approving the Covenant, Congress did exactly that for part of the Trust Territory, the Northern Mariana Islands. The Covenant provided a new and very specific regime for the governance of the Northern Mariana [11] Islands, replacing the broad general authority conferred on the President and, through the President, on the Secretary of the Interior by section 1681(a) of title 48.

Section 103 of the Covenant provides that "[t]he people of the Northern Mariana Islands will have the right of self-government and will govern themselves with respect to internal affairs in accordance with a Constitution of their own adoption." Section 105 of the Covenant provides that this guarantee of local self-government cannot be modified except with the consent of the Government of the Northern Mariana Islands. (Sections 103 and 105 both became effective, pursuant to section 1003 of the Covenant prior to termination of the trusteeship.)

The Section-by-Section Analysis of the Covenant by the Marianas Political Status Commission notes that no similar guarantee of local self-government has been made by the United States "to territories such as Guam and the Virgin Islands." Marianas Political Status Commission, Section-by-Section Analysis of the Covenant (1975). The Commission also stated:

[12] Under a territorial relationship, the people do not have their own constitution and any right of self-government is dependent upon an organic act, which can be amended unilaterally by Congress. Under the Commonwealth relationship embodied in the Covenant, on the other hand, the people have the right of self-government explicitly, which under Section 105 cannot be altered without mutual consent. . . .

The fact that the people of the Northern Marianas will have the right of self-government and will govern themselves under their own constitution means that the Northern Mariana Islands will not be an agency or instrumentality of the United States Government. A territory is merely part of the United States Government and is subject to the direction of the Congress and Executive Branch of the Government. The Northern Mariana Islands government will be an independent government, like that of the states.

[13] Paul Leary notes that "[t]he Covenant represents a major advance over the status the territories [Guam, American Samoa and the Virgin Islands] presently possess with the United States and, in some respects, even over that of Puerto Rico. While the advantages of the agreement may not be as great as the representatives of the Northern Marianas believed when it was signed, it constitutes a substantial alteration in the terms of federal-territorial relations." Leary, The Northern Marianas Covenant and American Territorial Relations 1 (University of California, Berkeley, Institute of Governmental Studies, Research Report 80-1; 1980).

Significantly, the Covenant makes no provision whatsoever for oversight of the Government of the Northern Mariana Islands by the Department of the Interior. The executive, legislative and judicial authority over the Northern Mariana Islands was carefully divided between the Government of the Northern Mariana Islands and the Federal Government, and the Northern Mariana Islands was given the authority to determine how, in its sphere, that authority would be further distributed. The last Secretarial Order for the governance of the Northern Mariana Islands recognized this fundamental change by providing that its pro-[14] visions would expire when the Constitution of the Northern Mariana Islands became effective. Secretarial Order 2989, part XIV (1976).

An important part of the Covenant is the promise of the United States to "provide direct multi-year financial support to the Government of the Northern Mariana Islands for local government operations, for capital improvement programs and for economic development." Covenant, sec. 701. Approval of the Covenant constituted "a commitment and pledge of the full faith and credit of the United States for the payment, as well as an authorization for the appropriation" of specified "guaranteed annual levels of direct grant assistance to the Government of the Northern Mariana Islands" for each of the first fiscal seven years after January 9, 1978, that is, until October 1, 1985. Id. sec. 702. Funds not obligated or expended in a fiscal year remain available for obligation or expenditure in subsequent fiscal years, so long as used for the purposes for which they were originally appropriated. Id. sec. 704(a). Annual payment levels were to continue at the levels specified in the Covenant after the initial seven-year period until changed by Congress. Id. sec. 704(d).

[15] The Marianas Political Status Commission, in commenting on Section 701 of the Covenant, emphasized that the multi-year financial assistance was to be "direct," meaning that "the Government of the Northern Mariana Islands will be able to determine the precise projects on which the funds will be used." Marianas Political Status Commission, Section-by-Section Analysis of the Covenant (1975).

Professor Leary concluded that, under the Covenant,

the Northern Marianas are not under the jurisdiction of the Interior Department, and not subject to such annoying restraints as the requirement to submit annual reports.

Leary, The Northern Marianas Covenant and American Territorial Relations (University of California, Berkeley, Institute of Governmental Studies, Research Report 80-1; 1980), at 31. He also noted that, under the Covenant, "[t]here is no federal comptroller appointed by the Interior Department to oversee expenditure of funds, as in the other territories, although the Northern Marianas enjoy a return of federal taxes and revenues."

^{Top of page}

Return to Table of Contents

[16]

The reassertion of Interior control. Despite the fact that the Covenant does not contemplate a role for the United States Department of the Interior in the governance of the Northern Mariana Islands, Congress involved the Department in the affairs of the Northern Mariana Islands by appropriating the funds required by the Covenant and other monies for the use of the Northern Mariana Islands to the Department for disbursement to the Northern Mariana Islands. See, for example, Public Law 99-190, sec. 101(d), 99 Stat. 1185, 1224, 1238 (1985). Provision of Covenant funds through the Department followed the well-established pattern of providing funds to the Trust Territory through that conduit, even though there was no longer a legal reason to channel funds to the Northern Mariana Islands through the Department. Compare Public Law 95-465, 92 Stat. 1279, 1288 (1978) with Public Law 94-165, 92 Stat. 977, 988 (1975). But, in addition to that "pipeline" role, the Department has recently assumed new supervisory functions with respect to the Northern Mariana Islands.

Section 203(a) of United States Public Law 97-357, 48 U.S.C. sec. 1692, enacted in 1982, requires the Governor of the Northern Mariana Islands to submit to the Secretary of the Interior, to [17] the Inspector General of the Department of the Interior, and to Congress, a comprehensive and detailed financial report within one hundred twenty days after the close of each fiscal year. Section 203(a) provides that the Inspector General shall audit these reports, and that the Governor shall submit a written response to the audit within sixty days after its issuance. The section by its own terms remains in effect after termination of the trusteeship.

Section 203(b) of Public Law 97-357, 48 U.S.C. sec. 1681b, granted to the Inspector General broad authority to audit all accounts and expenditures of the Government of the Northern Mariana Islands. The audit authority was not limited to accounts relating to the expenditure of federal grant funds, but was specifically extended to "all activities" of the Government of the Northern Mariana Islands.

Section 902 of the Covenant, authorizing these consultations and also the formulation of recommendations regarding future multi-year financial assistance by the United States to the Northern Mariana Islands, requires the appointment of special representatives by the Governor of the Northern Mariana Islands [18] and the President of the United States. No restrictions are placed on whom the President may appoint, but the President appointed as his special representative for the initial consultations under each heading the Assistant Secretary of Interior for Territorial and International Affairs. From the Northern Mariana Islands point of view, this seems a clear effort to return the Northern Mariana Islands to Interior control.

Further, during the negotiations on multi-year financial assistance with the Northern Mariana Islands, the Federal Government made substantial efforts to become deeply involved in overseeing what are indisputably functions of local self-government: planning for capital improvements and economic development; determining the appropriate mix of public and private sector functions in the local economy; administering local utility services; and determining the nature of the retirement system for employees of the local government.

[19] Regardless of the wisdom of any of the particular proposals discussed during the negotiation of multi-year financial assistance, those proposals would have involved the Department of Interior deeply in overseeing self-government in the Northern Mariana Islands. As Representative Udall noted:

Among other deficiencies, the proposed method [of providing the multi-year financial assistance] would contradict the guaranteed nature of this assistance. Subjecting the assistance we provide by law on a full faith and credit basis to withholding without approval in law would make a mockery of the commitment.

Permitting the withholding to be done at the discretion of the Secretary of the Interior would assign the Secretary broad powers not conferred upon him by the covenant. While we have a great deal of respect for and confidence in the current managers of the Department's Office of Territorial and International Affairs, we cannot make a self-governing commonwealth captive to the judgments of any person who may hold their offices.

[20] 132 Congressional Record H5274, H5278-79 (daily ed., August 1, 1986).

One other indication of the attitude of the Department of the Interior is worth noting. In December 1985 the Department issued a notice describing its internal organization. That notice stated that the Assistant Secretary for Territorial and International Affairs

discharges the authority and responsibility of the Secretary [of Interior] for activities pertaining to territorial areas . . . [and] is responsible for promoting the economic, social, and political development of the U.S. territories of Guam, American Samoa, the Virgin Islands, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, and the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands.

50 Federal Register 51455, 51456 (Dec. 17, 1985). See also id. at 51458. While the Federal Government can undertake, under the Constitution, the responsibility of promoting the economic, [21] social, and political development of the States of the United States, it does not generally do so. The assumption of such a broad mantle of responsibility with respect to the Northern Mariana Islands, without any statutory direction by Congress to assume that responsibility, indicates a reluctance to allow the development of self-government in the Northern Mariana Islands.

To similar effect is the recently-issued executive order, providing that "the relations of the United States with the Government of the Northern Mariana Islands shall, in all matters not the program responsibility of another Federal department or agency, be under the general administrative supervision of the Secretary of the Interior." Even though that order on its face does not grant the Secretary any powers derogatory of self-government in the Northern Mariana Islands, it reflects again a predisposition to regard the Northern Mariana Islands as just another territory or possession of the United States.

^{Top of page}

Return to Table of Contents

If the Federal Government attempts to limit the rights of a State of the United States to local self-government, the inhabitants of the State can affect that action of the Federal Government through their elected representatives in the legislative branch of the national government and through their votes for the next chief executive of the national government. In addition, the inhabitants of a State can mount a court challenge to the federal action under the Ninth Amendment to the Constitution, which reserves to the States or their inhabitants all powers not delegated to the Federal Government by the Constitution and not prohibited to the States by that document.

[23] The inhabitants of the Northern Mariana Islands have no such protections. They have no elected representatives in the United States Senate or House of Representatives, no vote for the presidency, and do not have the status of inhabitants of a State under the Federal Constitution. Limitations on their right to govern themselves are consequently of an entirely different order than those placed on the inhabitants of a State under, for example, the federal commerce power, and are appropriate only if there is a compelling national interest in their imposition.

^{Top of page}

Return to Table of Contents

Restrictions imposed on the right of the Northern Mariana Islands to local self-government are in derogation of a specific right agreed to in the Covenant. In Section 103 of the Covenant, the United States agreed that the Northern Mariana Islands would have the right of local self-government and the right to govern itself with respect to internal affairs under its own consti-[24] tution. In Section 105 of the Covenant, the United States agreed that Section 103 could be modified only with the consent of the Northern Mariana Islands.

The United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit in a recent case discussed the Commonwealth status of Puerto Rico in language that is also applicable to the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands:

[I]n 1952, Puerto Rico ceased being a territory of the United States subject to the plenary powers of Congress as provided in the Federal Constitution. The authority exercised by the federal government emanated thereafter from the compact itself. Under the compact between the people of Puerto Rico and the United States, Congress cannot amend the Puerto Rico Constitution unilaterally, and the government of Puerto Rico [25] is no longer a federal government agency exercising delegated power. . . .

Under its Commonwealth status, "Puerto Rico, like a state, is an autonomous political entity, 'sovereign over matters not ruled by the Constitution.'" While the creation of the Commonwealth granted Puerto Rico authority over its own local affairs, Congress maintains similar powers over Puerto Rico as it possesses over the federal states.

United States v. Quinones, 758 F.2d 40, 42-43 (1985). The Northern Mariana Islands, of course, has a political status distinct from that of Puerto Rico. That difference favors an even stronger right to self-government in the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands than the Quinones court found to exist in Puerto Rico. As the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit has stated:

[26] As a commonwealth, the [Northern Mariana Islands] will enjoy a right to self-government guaranteed by the mutual consent provisions of the Covenant. No similar guarantees have been made to Puerto Rico or any other territory.

Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands v. Atalig, 723 F.2d 682, 691 n. 28 (1984), certiorari denied, 467 U.S. 1244 (1984).

^{Top of page}

Return to Table of Contents

The controlling international law on the achievement of self-government by a non-self-governing territory is generally considered to be embodied in principles contained in the Annex to General Assembly Resolution 1541 (XV) of December 15, 1960. Principle VI in that Annex states:

A Non-Self-Governing Territory can be said to have reached a full measure of self-government by:

[27]

(a) Emergence as a sovereign independent State;

(b) Free association with an independent State; or

(c) Integration with an independent State.

The Northern Mariana Islands by this standard does not reach a full measure of self-government on termination of the trusteeship. It certainly does not become a sovereign independent state. It does not become freely associated with the United States because it does not have the power under the Covenant to disassociate itself from the sovereignty of the United States. See Principle VII of the above-cited Annex.

Integration with an independent State, the United States, also is not achieved, because such integration requires complete equality between the peoples of the Northern Mariana Islands and the United States, including "equal rights and opportunities for [28] representation and participation at all levels in the executive, legislative and judicial organs of government." See Principle VIII of the above-cited Annex.

The Commonwealth, of course, has long recognized that the status achieved under the Covenant did not comport with the standards for self-government set out under General Assembly Resolution 1541 (XV). Given its isolated location, small population, and desire for a permanent association with the United States, it nonetheless decided to proceed with the Covenant arrangement with the United States. As Lieutenant Governor Pedro A. Tenorio noted in his opening statement at the May 1986 session of the United Nations Trusteeship Council, the session that approved termination of the trusteeship, the Commonwealth considered that its interests are protected, even though the citizens of the Northern Mariana Islands do not fully participate in the political processes of the United States, because of the mutually binding nature of the Covenant.

If the Northern Mariana Islands is incorrect in relying on the promise of the United States that the Covenant is mutually binding, that the guaranteed right of self-government is irre-[29] vocable, the validity of the entire arrangement becomes suspect under international law. If the only reason the Covenant arrangement passes muster under international law is because of guarantees that fundamental nature of the arrangement cannot be changed except by mutual consent, the United States should be considered bound by those guarantees under international law.

^{Top of page}

Return to Table of Contents

"Sovereign" nations, in international law, are entities entitled to enter into arrangements with other sovereign nations. When a sovereign nation desires to enter into an arrangement affecting a particular area of geographical territory not under its own dominion, it can only enter into that arrangement with the nation having sovereignty over the area in question. See generally The Corfu Channel Case (United Kingdom v. Albania), Judgment (Merits), April 9, 1949, 4, 35, quoted in 1 Whiteman, [30] Digest of International Law 253 (1961); United States v. Spelar, 338 U.S. 217 (1949); 1 Schwarzenberger, International Law 58-59 (1949), quoted in 1 Whiteman, above, at 261.

Thus, if a foreign nation wanted to enter into a treaty affecting the Northern Mariana Islands, its first inquiry would be to determine what nation exercises sovereignty over those islands. Does the Northern Mariana Islands have international sovereignty in its own right or is that sovereignty exercised by some other nation?

Throughout its administration of the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands, the United States always disclaimed "sovereignty" over those islands. 1 Whiteman, Digest of International Law 777-78 (1961), quoting U.N. Security Council Official Records, 116th Meeting, March 7, 1947, at 473. See also Gale v. Andrus, 643 F.2d 826, 832 (D.C. Cir. 1980); Porter v. United States, 496 F.2d 583, 588 n. 4 (Ct. Cl. 1974), certiorari denied, 420 U.S. 1004 (1975). As negotiations for the future political status of Micronesia progressed, different views on the post-trusteeship locus of international sovereignty became apparent. The entities that are now the Federated States of Micronesia, the Republic of the [31] Marshall Islands, and the Republic of Palau each insisted that they be sovereign in their own right. See Section 121(c) of the Compact of Free Association for the Federated States of Micronesia and the Republic of the Marshall Islands, as approved by Public Law 99-239, sec. 201, 99 Stat. 1770 (1986), 48 U.S.C. sec. 1681 note; Section 121 of the Compact of Free Association for the Republic of Palau, reprinted at 132 Congressional Record H10470, Hl0471, H10473 (October 16, 1986).

The Northern Mariana Islands, on the other hand, did not insist on retaining international sovereignty in its own name. Instead, it agreed to Section 101 of the Covenant, allowing the United States to exercise sovereignty on its behalf in the international arena.

The grant of sovereignty in Section 101 was not intended to imply that the Federal Government would have total power over the Northern Mariana Islands. If such were its intent, the power of self-government, granted by Section 103 of the Covenant and guaranteed by the mutual-consent requirement of Section 105 of that document would be meaningless, a "monumental hoax" perpetrated on the people of the Northern Mariana Islands. See [32] Figueroa v. United States, 232 F.2d 615, 620 (1st Cir. 1956). That surely was not the intent of those who negotiated the Covenant.

^{Top of page}

Return to Table of Contents

Protection of the Commonwealth's right to self-government is consistent with the pronounced policy of President Reagan.

One of the hallmarks of the current Administration in the United States has been an emphasis on the need to deregulate and to decentralize power, a commitment to decreasing the size and power of the Federal Government. President Reagan has consistently labored to return authority, responsibility, and revenue resources to State and local governments and to eliminate Federal controls imposed on local government from Washington, D.C. See, for example, President Ronald Reagan, Message to the Congress Transmitting Proposed Federalism Legislation, February 24, 1983, reprinted at 1 Public Papers of the Presidents, Administration of Ronald Reagan, 1983, at 297 (1984).

[33] The increase in the administrative power of federal officials over the Northern Mariana Islands is directly contrary to Administration policy. The arguments by the Administration in favor of local self-government for localities within a State of the United States apply with all the more force to localities, such as the Northern Mariana Islands, located more than 9,000 miles from Washington and lacking voice and vote in the national political process.

President Reagan stated the issue with his usual succinctness in an address before a joint session of the Oklahoma State Legislature on March 16, 1982:

Today, our citizens are far removed from those who make decisions that dramatically affect their lives. Often individuals are confronted with edicts issued thousands of miles away by people for whom no one has ever voted. This isn't freedom. It is not democracy. And it doesn't work.

* * * * *

^{Top of page}

Return to Table of Contents