Delegates submitted their directives to the chair and prepared for the ensuing
debate. All the committees were in the general assembly, with the chairs of each
committee representing it. The debate commenced as the hall slowly quieted
down after finishing their research and discussion regarding the debate and the
directives. The chair asked the house to kindly come to order.
The directives submitted by the cultural committee were going to be debated.
Representatives of the culture committee took the floor and presented their
argument. The main point of their directive was to facilitate communication with
extraterrestrials. There were points of information to this argument, for example
the delegate of Sri Lanka challenged them by asking them how they planned to
communicate with extraterrestrials. The Delegation of Italy was going to present
his argument for or against the directive but was called from the floor for not
wearing a jacket. Thus, the delegate of Indonesia was allowed to take the floor
first. The delegate presented various arguments against the directive. She also
took three points of information. An amendment to this directive was proposed by
the UNC. They faced three points of information. A motion to extend the points of
information was denied. A voting procedure for or against the amendment was
carried out. A majority against the amendment led to failure of amendment. After
the presentation and points of information for the second amendment a voting
procedure was carried out for it. A majority of votes for the amendment led to it
Now the council moved into voting for or against the directive as a whole. The
directive passed because of an overwhelming majority..
Now the council moved to debate of the second directive submitted by the
delegation of Indonesia with regard to unidentified flying objects, and search of
extraterrestrial life. The delegations of UNCSTE, the United Kingdom and Libya
presented their points of information for this directive. There was a motion for
extending the points of information which was approved for two more points of
information. There was another motion to further extend the points of information
which was denied after an objection.
An amendment to one of the clauses of the directive was presented by the
UNCSTE. There were several points of information to this amendment, of which
three were entertained. For example, the delegate of India inquired whether the
delegation of UNCSTE not believe that the whole world should be prepared.
Voting procedures were carried out for or against the amendment, which resulted
in the amendment being passed.
Delegates then moved to speak for or against the directive as a whole. The
Emergency Council of Cultural Perspective spoke against the directive proposed
by the delegation of Indonesia, and faced three points of information by
Switzerland, El Salvador, and Senegal. There was a motion to carry out voting
procedures for or against the directive as a whole, and the directive was not
There was now a debate on the third and the last directive submitted by the
UNCSTD, who presented their directive and then took points of information by
Italy, which was null because the delegation of Italy had failed to read the
directive fully. Due to time constraints, only one amendment and only one
speaker for or against the directive was entertained. Voting procedures were
carried now to vote for or against the third directive, which passed by a majority.
This was followed by a round of applause. Then the delegates voted for the
resolution as a whole, which consisted of the the first and third directives. This
resolution passed and this proved that the first and the third directives concurred
to form a whole resolution.
This signalled the end of the session, at which point the confessions submitted
anonymously by the delegates were read out.