citer le cas de la Commission IV, administrée 
par la France pour la période 1972—1976? La 
Société française comme un petit nombre d’aut- 
res sociétes nationales a réussi jusqu’ici à rem- 
plir ses obligations en la matière. L’organisation 
d’un Symposium à Paris en 1974, la publication 
des archives de ce Symposium, la gratuité des 
inscriptions, de l’impression et de la distribution 
des actes du Symposium, l’édition des confé- 
rences sur invitation pour le Congrès d’Helsinki 
dans celle des langues officielles que choisit 
l’auteur représentèrent une dépense totale de 
128000 francs français, soit 65600 francs suis- 
ses: 10000 francs ayant été accordés par le Mi- 
nistère français des Affaires étrangères, 5000 
francs venant de la location de stands à des 
exposants, 30000 francs des annonceurs (il 
conviendrait d’en déduire le montant des frais 
d’annonces en année normale), 34 500 francs de 
l'IGN, sans compter les dépenses de personnel, 
48 500 francs, soit environ 25 000 francs suisses 
demeurérent à la charge de la Société frangaise 
de photogrammétrie. 
Il est certain qu'en multipliant le nombre des 
Groupes de travail et en en confiant l'administra- 
tion à un plus grand nombre de pays, on ac- 
croitrait l'intérét porté à la photogrammétrie dans 
le monde entier, on imposerait aux diverses so- 
ciétés nationales concernées une charge ma- 
térielle raisonnable, on diminuerait la charge du 
membre présidant la Commission et, en rassem- 
blant un plus grand nombre d'experts au sein de 
la Commission, on rendrait plus efficace l'action 
de la SIP. 
L'effort de chaque responsable de la SIP doit 
tendre au développement de cette action. Il n'est 
peut-étre pas nécessaire de créer un Groupe de 
travail pour la promouvoir: le nouveau Conseil 
devrait pouvoir donner de lui-même quelques 
lignes directrices. 
J'ajoute que la multiplication du nombre des 
Groupes de travail doit faciliter le travail en com- 
mun des photogrammétres classiques et des 
spécialistes de la télédétection, comme l’inter- 
pénétration pratique des zones d’intérêt communs 
de la SIP et de Sociétés telles que la FIG, l’AIC 
ou l'AIG. 
l| est dans mes intentions de préciser certains 
points, notamment en ce qui concerne les Group- 
es de travail, au fur et à mesure de l'élection des 
Membres qui auront la charge d'animer une Com- 
mission technique. 
Translation: 
Obligations imposed on Member Societies 
having accepted responsibility for a Tech- 
nical Commission 
At the present stage, the obligations of Member 
Societies having accepted responsibility for a 
Technical Commission are given by the I.S.P. 
Statutes and Bye-Laws. To solve any question, 
one can but look at the regulations. If the Stat- 
utes and Bye-Laws appeared to be somewhat 
obsolete, creating an ad-hoc Working Group be- 
comes necessary to study the convenient amend- 
ments to be proposed at the General Assembly 
for approval. 
56 
Statute 10 says: 
The Technical Commissions are responsible for 
the scientific work of the Society, they shall re- 
port to the Congress in accordance with the 
various resolutions of the Congress. 
Responsibility for the work of each Technical 
Commission during the interval between two suc- 
cessive Congresses shall be entrusted by the 
General Assembly to one of the Members or to 
a number of Members who have agreed to col- 
laborate. The Member (or Members) concerned 
shall propose the President of the Commission. 
The President shall be elected by the General 
Assembly or in case of necessity, by the Coun- 
cil. The Member (or Members) shall itself ap- 
point the Board of the Commission and shall 
assume responsibility for the expenses of run- 
ning the Commission, including those (not other- 
wise assured by authors or countries) of print- 
ing all reports of its Working Groups and of its 
other activities and its invited papers. 
Bye-Laws 19, 21, 26 say: 
19. In choosing the Member or group of Mem- 
bers to be entrusted under the Statutes with the 
responsibility for the work of a Commission, the 
General Assembly shall take into consideration 
all relevant factors, including in particular: 
— the various Members willing to undertake the 
responsibility, 
— the scientific and technical ability of each 
Candidate, 
— the photogrammetric standing and ability of 
the persons proposed as Commission Presi- 
dent, 
— the ability and willingness of each Member 
candidate and other organizations in its 
country to support a Commission Board. 
21. The Member entrusted with responsibility for 
a Technical Commission shall give its fullest 
technical and financial support to the Commis- 
sion Board. 
26. The main tasks of a Technical Commission 
shall be: 
— to follow the technical and scientific pro- 
gress within its field and to report thereon 
to the Congress, 
— to provide initiative in technical and scien- 
tific progress, especially by such means as 
setting up Working Groups, arranging inter- 
national Symposiums, organizing experi- 
ments and research, 
— to identify the results of research and devel- 
opment in order to present them for discus- 
sion to the Congress. 
Before arranging international Symposiums the 
Commissions shall obtain the consent of the 
Council. Such Symposiums shall be devoted to 
the preparation for the ensuing Congress or to 
the study in depth of a particular subject within 
the field of the Commission. 
Of course, to have a full knowledge of the obliga- 
tions of Member Bodies, it is good to look at 
other items in the Bye-Laws. So the charge of a 
Member Body which accepts to chair a Tech- 
nical Commission is heavy. As an example, may