Questions of Interpretation and Application of the 1971 Montreal Convention arising from the Aerial Incident at Lockerbie (Libyan Arab Jamahiriya v. United States of America) - New cases introduce by

Document Number
089-19920303-PRE-01-00-EN
Document Type
Number (Press Release, Order, etc)
1992/1
Date of the Document
Document File

INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE

Telefax(070•3649928).Telex32323.
Communiqué
unorricial
for immediate release

Last communiquéin 1991
series was No. 91/35

No. 92/1
3 March 1992

New cases submitted by Libya

The. following information is com.municated to the Press by the
Registry of the International Court of Justice:

In disputes concerning the interpretation or application of the
Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts Against the Safety of
Civil Aviation, concluded at Montreal on 23 September 1971, arising out
of the crash of Pan-Am flight 103 at Lockerbie (United Kingdom) on
21 December 1988, the Socialist People's Libyan Arab Jamahiriya filed in
the Registry of the Court, on 3 March 1992, two separate Applications
instituting proceedings against the United Kingdom of Great Britain and
Northern Ireland and the United States of America respectively.

In each Application Libya contends that, "it bas not been possible
to settle this dispute by negotiations" and that "the Parties have also
been unable to agree on the organisation of an arbitration to bear the
matter". It has accordingly submitted the disputes to the Court on the
basis of Article 14, paragraph 1, of the Montreal Convention.

In the Applications, Libya refera to the charging of two Libyan
nationale by the Lord Advocate of Scotland and by a Grand Jury of the
United States respectively, with having caused a bomb to be placed aboard
the Pan-Am flight, which bomb subsequently exploded, causing the
aeroplane to crash.

Libya contends that the United Kingdom and the United States

respect!vely, rejecting the Libyan efforts to resolve the matter within
the framework of international law, including the Montreal Convention,
are pressuring it into surrendering the two Libyan nationale for trial.

In-this connection Libya refera to Article 1 of the Montreal
Convention according to which the charge constitutes an offence and to
the severa! ether Articles of that Convention dealing with Libya's
alleged jurisdiction over the matter and its prosecution thereof, which
Libya alleges are breached by the United Kingdom and the United States

respectively. - 2 -

Libya accordingly requests the Court to adjudge and declare as
follows:

(a) That Libya bas fully complied-with all of its obligations under
the Montreal Convention;

(b) That the United Kingdom and the United States respectively have
breached, and are continuing to breach, their legal obligations

to Libya under Articles 5(2), 5(3), 7, 8(2) and 11 of the
Montreal Convention; and

(c) That the United Kingdom and the United States respectively are
under a legal obligation immediately to cease and desist from
such breaches and from-the use of any and all force or threats
against Libya, including the threat of force against Libya, and ~)
from all violations of the sovereignty, territorial integrity,
and the political independence of Libya.

*

* *

On the same day, Libya made two separate requests to the Court to
indicate forthwith the following provisional measures:

(a) To enjoin the United ~ngdom and the United States respectively
--- from taking any action against Libya calculated to coerce or

campel Libya to surrender the accused individuals to any
jurisdiction outside of Libya; and

(b) to ensure that no steps are talŒn that would prejudice in a.ny 411
--- way the rights of Libya with respect to the legal proceedings
that are the subject of Libya's Applications.

In view of the seriousness of the situation, Libya bas also
requested that, pending the meeting of the Court, the President exercise
his power under Article 74, paragraph 4, of the Rules of Court to call
upon the Parties to act in such a way as to enable any Order the Court
may make on Libya's request.for provisional measures to have its
appropriate effects.

Libya finally asked the Court to set a date for hearings on its
requests at the earliest possible time.

ICJ document subtitle

- New cases introduce by Libya

Document file FR
Document Long Title

Questions of Interpretation and Application of the 1971 Montreal Convention arising from the Aerial Incident at Lockerbie (Libyan Arab Jamahiriya v. United States of America) - New cases introduce by Libya

Links