because it is impossible to consider separately these two concepts. . . . This analysis appears below. In both Conventions the IFRB is obliged (c) to furnish advice to Members with a view to the operation of the maximum practicable number of radio channels in those portions of the spectrum where harmful interference may occur. In paragraph 3.d) of the 1973 Convention the IFRB, as in the 1965 Convention, paragraph 3.c), is obliged, in addition to performing essential duties, also to "perform any additional duties, concerned with the assignment and utilization of frequencies." To authorize the IFRB a new involvement in geostationary satellite orbits, the following language has been added to the quoted phrase from Article 10, namely, "and with the utilization of the geostationary satellite orbit, in accordance with the procedures provided for in the Radio Regulations." However, such additional duties of the IFRB, both under the 1965 and the 1973 Convention, are to be undertaken only "as prescribed by a competent conference of the Union, or by the Administrative Council with the consent of a majority of the Members of the Union, in preparation for or in pursuance of the decisions of such a conference." Finally, both Conventions in Articles 13 and 10 prescribe that the IFRB is to "maintain such essential records as may be related to the performance of its duties." Numerous provisions of an administrative nature set out in the 1965 Convention are not repeated in Article 10 of Richard E. Butler, "World Administrative Radio Conference for Planning Broadcasting Satellite Service," 5 Journal of Space Law 93 (1977). Mr. Butler is the Deputy Secretary-General of the International Telecommunication Union. Infra, pp. 29, 49, 55-59.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTU5NjU0Mg==