EXHIBITSTO THE MEMORIALOF THE
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Exhibit 1. Letter dated 23 Decernber 1991 £rom the Acting
PermanentRepresentativeof the United States of
America to the United Nations addressedto the
Secretary-General (UnitedNations Document A/46/83-
S/23317).
Exhibit 2. United Nations Press Release: Security Council
Condemns Destruction of Pan Am Flight 103 (United
Nations Document SC/5057; 30 December 1988).
Exhibit 3. United States Code, Title 28, Sections 1861 through
1869.
Exhibit 4, United States FederalRules of CriminalProcedure,
Rules 6 through 9.
Exhibit 5. Jury Selection Plan for the United States District
Court for the District of Columbia (as amended
through 9 September 1993).
Exhibit 6. U.Ç. Department of Justice Memorandum: Summary of
CriminalProcedurein Federal Criminal Cases in the
United States.
Exhibit 7. United States Code, Title 18, Section 32
(Destruction of aircraftor aircraftfacilities) .
United States Code, Title 18, Section 844 (Malicious
destructionof property used in or affecting
interstate or foreigncommerce,causing deaths).
United States Code, Title 18, Section 2332
(Terroristmurders of United States nationals
outside the United States; this section was codified
October 29,St1992).ode, Title 18, Section 2331 until
United States Code, Title 18, Section 371
(Conspiracy to commitcriminaloffense).
Exhibit 8. Letterdated 20 December1991 from the Permanent
Representative of the United Kingdom of Great
Britain and Northern Ireland to the United Nations
addressed to the Secretary-General (UnitedNations
Document A/46/826-Ç/23307; 31 December1991).Exhibit 9. Letter dated 20 December 1991 £rom the Permanent
Representative of the United States of America to
the United Nations addressed to the Secretary-
General (UnitedMations Document A/46/827-~/23398;
31 Deçember 1991).
Exhibit 16. Zetter dated 20 December 1991 £rom the Permanent
Representative of France to the United Nations
addressed to the Secretary-General (~/46/825-
Sl23306; 31 December 1991).
Exhibit 11. Letter dated 20 Deceder 1991 from the Permanent
Representativesof France, the United Kingdom of
Great Britain and Narthern Irelandand the United
States of America to the United Nations addressed to
the Secretary-General {UnitedNations Document
'A/46/828-S/23309; 31 December 1991).
Exhibit 12. Letter dated 17 November 1991 £rom the Permanent
Representative of the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya to the
United Nations addressedto the Secretary-General
(UnitedNations Document A/46/660-~/23226;
20 November 1991).
Exhiblt 13. Letter dated 20 November 1991 from the Permanent
Representativeof the Libyan Arab Jamahiriyato the
United Nations addressed to the Secretary-General
(UnitedNations DocumentA/46/844-S/23416;
13 January 1992).
Exhibit 14. Letter dated 8 January 1992 £rom the Permanent
Representativeof the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya to the
United Nations addressed to the Secretary-General
(UnitedNations Document ~1461841-~/23396; 9 January
1992).
Exhibit 15. Letter dated 17 January 1992 from the Permanent
Representative of the Libyan kab Jamahiriya to the
United Nations addressed to the President of the
Security Council (UnitedNations Document S/23436;
17 January 1992).
Exhibit 16. Letter dated 18 January 1992 from the Permanent
Representativeof the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya to the
United Nations addressedto the Presidentof the
SecurityCouncil (UnitedNationsDocumentS/23441;
18 January1992).
Exhibit 17. Convention for the~,Suppressioo nf Unlawful Acts
Against the Safety of International Civil Aviation,
done at Montrealon 23 September1971.Exhibit 18. Resolution 731, United Nations Security Council,
3033rd meeting, 21 January 1992 (United Nations
Document S/RES/731) .
Exhibit 19. Provisional Verbatim Record of the Three Thousand
and Thirty Third Meeting of the Security Council
(United Nations Document S/PV.3033;21 January
1992).
Exhibit 20. Report by the Secretary-General Pursuant to
Paragraph 4 of Security Council Resolution731
(United Nations Document S/23594; 11 February 19921.
Exhibit 21, Further Report by the Secretary-GeneralPursuant to
Paragraph 4 of Security Council Resolution 731
(UnitedNations Document S/23672; 3 Harch 1992).
Exhibit 22. ProvisionalVerbatim Record of the Three Thousand
and Sixty-ThirdMeetingof the Security Council
(UnitedNationsDocumentS/PV.3063; 31 March 1992).
Exhibit 23. Resalution 748, United Nations Security Council,
3063rd meeting, 31 March 1992, (United Nations
Documents/~ES/748).
Exhibit 24. Note by the President of the Security Council
(United Nations Document S/24424; 12 August 1992).
Exhibit 25. Note by the President of the Security Council
(UnitedNations Document S/24925; 9 December 1992).
Exhibit 26. Note by the President of the SecurityCouncil
{United Nations Document S/25554; 8 April 1993).
Exhibit 27, Note by the Presidentof the SecurityCouncil
(UnitedNationsDocument SJ26303; 13 August 1993) .
Exhibit 28. Letter dated 13 August 1993 from the representatives
of France, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and
NorthernIrelandand the United States of America to
the UnitedNations addressed to the Secretary-
General (UnitedNations Document ~/48/314-S/26304;
13 August 1993).
Exhibit 29. Letterdated 22 September1993 £romthe Permanent
Representativeof the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya to the
United NationsAddressedto the Secretary-General
(UnitedNations Document S/26500; 28 September
1993).Exhibit 30 United States cable dated 22 September 1993 from
Washington, D.C. to United States Mission to the
United Nations, New York.
Exhibit 31. Letter dated 1 October 1993 £rom the Permanent
Representative of the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya to the
United Nations addressed to the Secretary-General
(UnitedNations Document S/26523; 1 October 1993).
Exhibit 32. Resolution 883, United Nations Security Council
3312th meeting, 11 November1993, {United Nations
Document S/RES/883).
Exhibit 33. Provisional Verbatim Record of the Three Thousand
Thsee Hundred and TwelfthMeeting of the Security
Council (UnitedNations Document S/~V.3312;
11 November 1993).
Exhibit 34. Resolution286, UnitedNationsSecurityCouncil,
1552nd meeting, 9 September 1970,
Exhibit 35. Note by the Presidentof the SecurityCouncil,
(UnitedNations DocumentS/17554; 9 October 1985) .
Exhibit 36. Resolution 579, United Nations Security Council,
2637thmeeting, 18 December 1985.
Exhibit 37. Resoltition635, United Nations Security council,
2869th meeting, 14 3une 1989.
Exhibit 38. Resolution 687, United NationsSecurityGouncil,
2981stmeeting, 3 April 1991.
Exhibit 39* Note by the President of the Security Council
(United Nations Document S/23500; 31 January 1992).
Exhibit 40. Statementby the Presidentof the Security Council
(UnitedNationsDocumentS/PRST/1994/40; 29 July
1994).
Exhibit41. Declaration on Principlesof InternationalLaw
Concerning Frienély Relationsand Co-operation hong
States in Accordance with the Charter of the United
Nations, Resolution2625 (XXV),United Nations
GeneralAssembly,1883rdPlenaryMeeting, 24 Qctober
1970.
Exhibit 42. Aerial Hijacking or Interference with Civil Air
Travel, Resolution'2645 (XXV), United Nations
Generak Assembly,1914th PlenaryMeeting,
25 November 1970.~xhibit 43. Measures to Eliminate International Terrorism,
Resolution 49/60, United Nations General Assembly,
84th Pkenary Meeting, 9 December 1994 (United
Nations DocumentA/RES/49/60; 17 February 1995).
Exhibit 44. Note by the President of the Security Counckl
(United Nations Document S/26861; 10 December 1993).
Exhibit 45. Note by the President of the Security Council
(United Nations DocumentS/PRST/1994/18; 12 April
1994).
Exhibit 46. Note by the President of the Security Council
(UnitedNations Document S/PRST/1994/41; 5 August
1994).
Note by the President of the Security Council
Exhibit 47. (United Nations Document ~/~~~~/1994/76; 30 November
1994) *
Exhibit 48. Note by the President of the Security Council
(United NationsDocument~/PR~~/1995/14; 30 March
1995).
Exhibit 49. Letter dated 28 July 1994 from the Secretary-General
addressedto the President of the Security Council
(United Nations DocumentS/1994/900; 29 July 1994).
Exhibit 50. Letter dated 9 December 1993 £rom the Chargé
D'AffairesA.I. of the Permanent Mission of the
Libyan Arab Jamahiriya to the United Nations
addressedto the Secretary-General (UnitedNations
Document S/26859;10 December 1993).
Exhibit 51, Letter dated 30 March 1995 from the Permanent
Representatives of France, the United Kingdom of
Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the United
States of America to the United Nations addressed to
the Secretary-General, (UnitedNations Document
A/50$128-S/1995/247; 30 March 1995).
Exhibit 52. Review of the Role of the internationalCourt of
Justice,Report of the Sixth Cornmittee (United
NationsDocumentA/8238;11 December 1970).
Exhibit 53. Review of the Role of the International Court of
Justice, Report of the Sixth Cornittee (United
Nations Document AJ.8568; 10 December 1971).Exhibit 54. M. Lachs, "The Revised Procedure of the
International Court of Justice" in ESSE
Exhibit 55. E. Jiménez de Aréchaga, "The Amendmentsto the Rules
of Procedureof the InternationalCourt of
pp.t1, 11,6andme13 (1973).al of International Law,
Exhibit 56. G. Guyomar,Commentaire du Réglernent de la Cour
Internationale de Justice:Interprétation et
Pratique, p. 371 (1972) .
Exhibit 57. Resoluéion 827, United Nations Security Council,
3217th meeting, 25 May 1993 (UnitedNationsDocument
S/RES/827) .
Zxhibit 58. Resolution 955, United Nations Security Cotincil,
3453rdmeeting, 8 November 1994 (United Nations
Document S/BEs/955).
Exhibit 59. Letter dated 5 August 1994 from the representatives
of France, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and
Northern freland and the United States of America to
the United Nations addressed to the Secretary-
General (UnitedNations DocumentR/49/299-
S/1994/938;8 August 19943.
Exhibit 60. S. Rosenne, The Law and Practiceof the
InternationalCourt, p. 79 (1985).
Exhièit 61. T. Elsen, Litispendence Between the International
Court of Justice and the Security Council, p. 59
(1986)Resolution 748, United Nations Security CounciL,
3063rd meeting, 31 March 1992
(UnitedNations Document s/RES/748)UNITED
NATIONS
SecurityCouncil Distr.
GENERAL
S/RES/748 (1992)
31 March 1992
Ado~ted bv the Securitv Çauncil at its 3063rd meetinq,
on 31 Marçh 1992
The Securitv Council,
Reaffirminq itç resolution 731 (1992) cf 21 January 1992,
Notinq the reports of the Secretary-General, If 2J
Dee~lv concerned that the Libyan Government has still not provided a full
and effective response to the requests in its resolution 7.31(1992) of
21 January 1992,
Convinced that the suppressionof acts of international terrorism,
kncluding those in which States are directly or indirectly involved, is
essential for the maintenance of international, peaee and security.
Recallinq that, in the çtatement issued on 31 January 1992 on the
occasion of the meeting of the Security Council at the level of headç of State
and Government, 3/ the members of the Council expressed theis deep concern
over acts of internationalterrorism, and emphasized the need for the
international community to deal effeetively with al1 such acts,
Reaffirminq that, in aceosdanse with the principle in Article 2,
paragraph 4, of the Charter of the United Nations, every State has the duty to
refrain fram organizing, instigating, assiçting or participating in terrosist
acts in another State or acquiesckng in organized activities within its
territory directed towards the commission of such acts, when such acts involve
a threat or use of force,
92-14910 41922 (E) 310392 310392 S/RES/748 41992)
Page 2
~etermininq, in this context, that the failure by the Libyan Government
to demonstrate by COnCrete actions its renunciationof terrorisrn and in
particular its continued failure to respond fully and effectively to the
requests in resolution731 (19921 constitute a threat ta internationalpeaçe
and seçurity,
Determined to eliminate international terrorism,
Reealling the right of States, under Article 50 of the Charter, to
consult the Security Council wheie they find thernselvesconfronted with
special economie problerns arising from the carrying out of preventive or
en£orcement measures,
Actinq under Chapter YI1 of the Charter,
1. Decides that the Libyan Government must now comply without any
further delay with paragraph 3 of resolution 731 (19921 regarding the requests
contained in documents S/23306, SI23308 and S123309:
2. Deeides also that the Libyan Gcvernrnent must commit itself
definitively to cease al1 forms of terrorist action and al1 assistance to
' terrorist groups and that it must prornptly, by çonçrete actions, demonstrate
its ,senunciationof terrorisrn:
3. Decides that, on 15 April 1992 al1 States shall adopt the measures
set out below, which shall apply until the Security Council decides that the
Libyan Government has complied with paragraphs 1 and 2 above.:
4. Deeides also that al1 States shall:
(a} Deny permission ta any aircsaft to take off fsom. land in or overfly
their territory if it is destined to land in or has takea off from the
territory of Libya, unkess the particularflight has been approved on grounds
of significant humanitarian need by the Cornmittee established by paragraph 9
below;
(b) Prohibit, by their nationals or £rom their territory, the çupply of
any aireraft or aircraft componeats to Libya. the provision of engineering and
maintenance servicinq of Libyan aiscraft or aircraft camponents, the
certification of airworthiness for Libyan aircraft. the payment of neu claims
against existing insurance contracts and the provision of new direct insurance
fer Libyan aircraft:
5. Decides furthes that al1 States shallr
{a) Prohibit any provision to Libya by their natianals ar from their
territory of arms and related material of al1 types, including the sale or
transfer of weapons and munition, military vehicles and equipment,
paramilitary police equipment and spare parts for the aforementioned, as well
as the provision of any types of equipment, supplies and grants of licensing
arrangements,for the manufacture or maintenance of the aforementioned: S/RES/748 (19921
Page 3
(b) Prohibit any provision to Libya by'their nationals or from their
territory of technical advice, assistanceor training selated to the
provision, manufacture, maintenance, or use of the items in (a) above:
(c) Withdraw any of their officiais or agents present in Libya to adviçe
the Libyan authoritieson military matters:
6. Decides that al1 States shall:
(a) Signifieantly reducethe number and the level of the staff at Libyan
diplornatic missions and consularposts and restritt or control the movement
within their territory of al1 such staff who remain; in the case of Libyan
missions to international organizatkons, the host State may, as it deems
neceçsary, consult the organization concerned on the measuses required to
implement this subparagraph;
b) Prevent the operation of al1 Libyan Arab Airlknes offices;
(c) Take all appropriatesteps tc deny entry to or expel Libyan
nationals who have been denied entry to or expelled from other States because
of their involvement in terrorist activities:
7. Calls upon al1 States, including States not mernbers of the United
Nations, and al1 international organizations,ta act strictlp in accordance
with the provisions of the present tesolution,notwithstanding the existence
of any rights or obligations conferred or impased by any international
agreement or any eontraçt entered inta or any licence or permit granted prior
to 15 April 1992;
8. Reauests all States to report to the Çecretary-General by
15 May 1992 on the measutes thep have instiluted for meeting the obligations
set out in paragraphs 3 to 7 above:
9. Decides to establish, in accordance with rule 28 of its provisional
rules of procedure, a Cornmittee of the Security Council consisting of al1 the
members of the Çouncil, ta undtrtake the following tasks and to report an its
vork to the Council with its observations and recommendations:
la) To examine the reports submitted pursuant to paragraph 8 above:
(b) Lo seek from al1 States further information regarding the action
taken by them concerningthe effective implementation of the measures imposed
by paragraphs 3 to 7 above:
(c) Lo consider any information brought to its attention by States
concerning violations of the measures imposedby paragraphs 3 to 7 above and.
in that context, to make reeomnendations to the Council on ways to increase
their qf fectiveness:S/REÇ/748 (1992)
Page 4
(d) To recommendappropriatemeasures in response to violations of the
rneasures irnposed by paragraphs 3 to 7 above and provide information on a
segular basis to the Secretary-Generalfor general distribution to Member
States:
(el To consider and to decide upon expeditiously any applicationby
States for the approval of flights on grounds of significant humanitarian need
in accordancewith paragraph 4 above:
To give special attention to any communications in accordance with
(f)
Article 50 of the Charter from any neighbouriag or other State with speeial
esonomic problerns that might arise from the carrying out of the measures
imposed by paragraphç 3 to 7 above;
10. Calls upon al1 States to eooperatefillly with the Committee in the
fulfilment of its task, including supplying such information as may be sought
by the Commkttee in pursuance af the present resolution;
11. Reauests the Seczetary-General to provide al1 necessary assistance
to the Committee and to make the necessary arrangements in the Çecretariat for
thiç purpose:
'12. Invites the Çecretasy-Gsneral sa continue his role as set out in
paragraph 4 of resolution331 (1992):
13. Decides that the Security Council shall, every 120 daps or sooner
should the situation so require, review the measures irnposed by paragraphs 3
te T above in the light of the cornpliance by the Libyan Goverment wifh
paragraphs 1 and 2 above taking into aecount, as appropriate, aay reports
provided by the Secretary-General on his role as set out in paraqraph 4 of
sesolution 731 (1992);
14. Decides to remain seized of the matter. Exhibit 24
Note by the President of the Security Council
(United Nations Document S/24424; 12 August 1992)UNITED
NATIONS
SecurityCouncil
Distr.
GENERAL
5/24424
$2 August 1992
ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
NOTE BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE SECURIm COUNCIL
AEter the consultations held on 12 August 1992, the President of the
SecurityCounçil issued the folloving staternent on behalf of the rnernbers in
canneetion with the item relating to the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya:
"The mernbers of the Security Council held informal consultatlans on
12 August 1992 pursuant to paragraph 13 of resolution 748 (1992), by
which the Council decided to review every 120 days or sooner, should the
situation ço require, the measures impcsed by paragraphs 3 ta 7 against
the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya.
"Aftet hearing al1 the opinions expresseci in the course of the
consultations,the President of the Council concluded that there uas no
agreement that the necessary conditions existed for modification of the
measures of sanctions establiçhed in paragraphs 3 to 7 of resolution
748 (1992)." Exhibit 25
Note by the President of the Security Council
(UnitedNations Document ~J24925; 9 December 1992)UNITED
NATIONS
Security Council Distr .
GENERAL
9 December 1992
ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
NOTE BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE SECUBITY COUNCIL ~
After the consultations held on 9 December 1992, the President of the
Security Couneil issued the following statemeat on behalf of the members in
connection with the item relating ta the Libyan Arab Jamahiriga:
"The members of the SecurityCouncil held informal consultations on
9 December 1992 pursuant to paragraph 13 of resolution748 (1992), by
which the Couneil deeided to reviaw every 120 aays or sooner, should the
situationso require, the measures imposed by paragrapbs 3 to 7 against
the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya.
"After hearing all the opinions expressed in tbe,courseaf the
consultations, the President of the Council concluded that there waç no
agreement that the necessary conBitkons eristsd for modification of the
measures of sanctions established in paragraphs 3 to 7 if resolution
748 (1992)." Exhibit 26
Note by the President of the Security Council
(United Nations Document S/25554; 8 April 1993)UNITED
NATIONS
Security Council
Distr.
GENE-
ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
NOTE BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE SECURITY COUNCIL
.w
After the consultationsheld on 8 Rpril 1993, the Fresldent of the Security
Council issued the following statement on behalf of the members in connection
with the item relating to the Libyan Arab Jamahkriya:
"The members of the Security Council held informalconsultations on
8 AprkL 1993 pussuant to paragraph 13 of rcsalution 748 (1992), by which
the Council decided to review every 120 days or sooner, should the
situation so require, the rneasures imposed by paragraphs 3 to 7 against the
Libyan Arab Jamahiriya.
"After hearing al1 the opinions expressed in the course of
consultations, the Preaident of the Couneil concluded that there was no
agreement that the neeessary conditions existed for modification of the
measures of sanctions established in paragraphe 3 to 7 of resolution
748 (1992)." Exhibit 27
Note by the President of the Seçurity Council
(United Nations Document S/26303; 13 August 1993)i UNITED
NATlONS
S
I
Security Council
1
S/26303
13 August 1993
ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
NOTE BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE SECURITY COUNCIL
After the consultationa held on 13 Auguet, the President of the Security
Council ieaued the following statement on behalf of the membere in connection
with the item relating te the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya:
"The members of the Security Couneil held informal consultationa on
13 Auguet 1993 pursuant to paragraph 13 of reeolution 748 (1992), by which
the Couneil decided to review every 120 daya or sooner, should the
situation BO require, the meaauree impoied by paragraphe 3 to 7 againat the
Libyan Arab Jamahiriya.
"After hearing al1 the opinions expreased in the course of
consultations, the Preeident of the Couneil eoncluded that there was no
agreement that the necessary conditions exi8ted for modification of the
meaSUre8 of sanctions eatabliehed in paragraphs 3 to 7 of reiolution
748 (1992)."
93-45091 (E) 130893 Exhibit 28
Letter dated 13 August 1993 from the representatives of France,
the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
and the United States of America to the United Nations
addressed to the Secretary-General
(UnitedNations Document ~/48/314-~/26304; 13 August 1993) UNITED
NATIONS
General Assernbly
Security Council
SECURIIY COUHCXL
Ferry-eighthyiar
We bars tbi homur te transmitharerith the tut oi a triparrira
dselitaclm iiiued by Our thres Qovemmenti on 13 Auguot 1993.locc uuiu)
eonctrning thm impl%mentmrion of Becurity Cauncfl reeolutioas 732 12992) and
748 (13921 by tb Llbym Arab Jamhiziya.
We should bs gzatifui if you vould havm the text of tus lcttar and its
annex cirmleted au a docummnt of the Çaneril Aesmmblv. under item 143 of the
provieional agenda, and of chs Securlry fauncil.
R1mOdii UrdmLiinrSurhl -1-
Eh.zg4a'4iLilrmb4.L. of Piwt Eiprament&tl- ol rha
th* Pannuiaat Missioof United 8rar.iQI *iirzicato Che
ttuUnLtid Xlnga of Ormr~ mitid witioni
Criciinand riarrliorZrcJuid of *a Govarnmenti of Pranee. WVnf KKinaQplg
pf Grepr Britain rnd Northa Ira- nndlh+unitdtea
Ovsf 16 monthe havm paaaed sinecthe Scmrity Couneil ~mpoaerd eanetrona on
Ehc Libyari ~vmrnment for failure CO eoniply vith ISB dimanda as set forch in
Vnited Harions Secutiry Couneil rmeolutaon 731 11992) that Libya eormit iteelf
eoncraraly ~nd definitivaly te ecasi al1 forma of terrorist action and al1
ainfo~ancc te torrorfat groups, agraa to eurrandar the tuo accueed cf bombing
Pan Am flight 103 for trial in Scatland or tha United Stacce. reipond fully to
tbΠrequisti put fonard by the French judgs inveetlgatfrig the bombing of WTA
flight 773, Ma pŒovLdS svAdurcr et Lnf-rmrtLen rL~ut the tûnJSibaga ef Pan *.m
fkight 103 and flight 771.
Today, for the fourth rime, the couneil han raviiwed tibyan cornplianet wsth
aanetiona ai called for in SecurityCouncilrteolution 748 (1991) and found
tibya ence again to bu in defianceof the Mill ef rho intamationil comuniry.
Izmtead o$ sesking ways to uooperrce with çha Couneil and the Seeritary-Gsniral
of che Wnittd Hatfons, Libyahss coniiseentlsy ought waye ~o avaid full
eamplione* .
The United States, the Wnicsd Kingdom ~nd Francs have ubeemed with
diminiehimgpotieacsi that the envoya of tha Saeritiry-Oeneral of the UniteC
Nation8 to Tripoli rcpiatadly coma baek ampty-handed,rithour indicrtaona of
eomplfiaecalthough vith aaeuraacca of Libya'o eooparstion. Ws have waitrd
~im ËOU~ montàa rcqueated by the 8cetttary-Oencral of thi Lergum of Arab 5tatei.
who visho4 to asne as an intemdiary betwean the internotional commun~ty ii.d
fha Lihy~as. Wa hava rmpaatadly rej~ctad Libyui afforre ta dlscraet the
intemutional emmunity frem ira laek of eompliancc with rqty offirs ta
aurrsridsr khi Lockrtbia suapeeti and to eoaiply wirh the riquirmrnents of French
jwtfee and CO pfove thairpartial conpliance vith the SecurlryCouncfS's
demande.
Rowsvar. our Lhrsa Oovirnmentn, in the intcreice of givin~ Libya aze las:
cbnet, $avs asked the Sterc~ary-Oeneralof the United Natiess :O look nt3
mattsr and takit the naeasirry .teps to aehiavm the full iqlerneriratie=. by the
Libyan Oovsramaat of reeolution 731 t1392) withfn 4Q to 45 days ..
If, by 0Ut-r firar, the Libyan Governmcnr han Pailed to co~ly watk
resolutioni 732 I1992j .ad 748 IÏ992;, including the transfer ro uni:el scacea
or Vnitid Kingdoai jurfsdictien of thr Lockcrbim suipaeco and cornpliance -;ch the
rtqueace of Rench jusciceon VPA Lligh: 777, ve will table a rosolutien
otrengthen5ngthe eanetionsin key ail-related,finanrial aca taernological
areao .
Once wra, Our chree tovernmento reitszota thit thay hava no hiddsn aga-da
and char. on the eontrary. upon full ~niplarnenrit:on by Lilys of Çeeusi~y COL-.:::
riiolutiona 731 (1997) and 748 (1992). the condicione would 5e mec ter rF.e
lifclrig of sanction# by the security cour,ci: Exhibit 29
Letter dated 22 September 1993 £rom the Permanent Repsesentative
of the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya to the United Nations
addressed to the Secretary-General
(United Nations Document S/26500; 28 September 1993)UNITED
NATIONS
Security Council
Distr.
GENERAL
S/26500
28 Septeuber 1993
ENGL1SH
ORIGINAL: ARABIC
LETTER DATED 22 SEPTEMBER 1993 FROH THE: PERMANENT REPRESENTATIVE
OF THE LfBYAN ARAB JAHAHIRIYA TO TEE UNITED NATIONS ADDRESSED TO
TO THE SECRETARY-GENERAL
I have the honour to refer to the letter dated 11 September 1993 £rom the
Seeretary of the General People's Committee for Foreign Liaison and
International Cooperation and to the accompanyingmernorandun on points relating
to the legal position of the Libyan Arab Jamahiriyawith regard ta Security
Couneil resolutions731 (1992)and 748 (1992), bath of which were handed te you
on 14 September 1993, and ehould be grateful if you would have them circulated
as a document of the Security Couneil.
(Siqned) Ali Ahmed ELHOUDERI
Permanent Repreaentat ive 3/26500
English
Page 2
Annex
Letter dated 11 Seatember 1993 frbm the Secretarv of the General
Peoole's Cornittee for Poreian Liaison and Enternational
Cooperation of the Libyan Arab Samahiriya addseesed ta the
Secretnry-General
1 refer ta Security Council resolution 731 (1992) concerning the requests
addressed to the Great Soeialist People's Libyan Arab Jamahiriya by the United
States of America, the United Kingdom and France.
1 al80 refer to the faet that the Great Jamahiriya hae declared that it
aceepts the aforeaaid reeolution and that it ie fully prepared tu deal with it
in a positive manner and in a spirit af coneern to brfng the truth to light and
of respect fer international legitimacy. You are fully informed, W. Seeretary-
General, of the measures the Great Jamahiriya ha8 taken to implernent the
provi~ioneof the resolution in question. le have notified you, through your
Peraonal Envoy and by our numesous lettersi that we have implemented al1 the
provisionsof the resolution txcept for a single point relating to the venue of
the trial, and we believe that it is posaible to reaeh a satisfaetory golution
on this matter if the States eoncerned will agsee to sit down directly with the
Great Jamahiriya to negotiatethereon in order to bring about a trial that is
just and fair.
since the three Western States continue to insiat that the Great Jarnahirkya
has not cumplked with resolution 731 (1992), most recently in their tripartite
declaration of 13 August 1993# the Great Jamahiriya and the attorneys for the
two suspects deem It appropriate to subrnit to you a aet of question8 to be put
to th= and to the rnembers of the Security Council with a view to seeking a
definitive clarification of the understanding that the three Western States have
of the resolution ao that the Great Jamahiriya may eee what, in their view, are
the pointa that it haa not implemented and sa that the resolution will not
. remain linpending and capable of being used to blaekmail the Great Jamahiriya for
a long the into the future.
ho reaponse of the three Western States to the queetions of the attorneya
for the two suspecta can be of aasiatance in reaching agreement on the venue of
the trial.
ZLccordingly, we hope that you will present theee queatione to the States
concerned and to the member~ of the Security Couneil with a view to obtaining a
preciee response, and we hope thie will be a atep towarda a mutual understanding
on devising a peaceful and aatisfactory solution to a problem into which rny
country has been thrust and which ha^ become an instrumentfor blaekmail.
(Sianed) Omar Mustafa AMUNTASSER
Çecretary of the General People's Commîttee
for Foreign Liaison and International Cooperation S/26500
Englieh
Page 3
Enclosure
MEMORANDUM TO THE SECRETARY-GENERALOF THE UNITED NATIONS
We have the honour to preoent Our compliments and should like to submit to
you the following mernorandun eettingforth legalpoints relating to the legal
position of the Great Jamahiriya on Seeurity Council resolutions 731 (1992) and
748 (1992).
Seeurity Council resolution 748 (1992) wae adopted on 21 Harch 1992, and it
impoeed iniquitousand anwarranted sanctionson the Jamahiriya rnerely pn grounds
of suspicion that Libyan individualshad cwnmitted aet~ againet an aireraft
belonging to the Pan American company and an aireraft belonging to the French
Company UTA.
Since the adoption of that resolution, whiek does not accord with the
general noms of international law or eetabliehed eugtomary principlesapproved
by the international eommunity, the Jamahiriya haa been striving éiligently, in
al1 aineerity and good faith, to.settle the dispute. The dispute ie not one
between the Jamahiriyaand the internationalcwimunity or the United Nations but
is a contrcversyprecipitated by the United Statea of Ameriea, the United
Kingdom and France beeauae of their diesatisfaction with the role assumed by the
Jamahiriya.
Support for the libesation movements of peoples and for their right to
freedam and overall and independent development doee not entail an adversarial
relatlonship between the Jamahiriya and the poples and Governments of the three
States. Indeed, the Jamahiriya eonatantly declares that it Fa prepared to
interact with theae Statee and othere on a basis of honour, dignity and respect
for the prineiplee of justice, equity and national sovereignty.
The role undertaken $y the Jamahiriya was a necessary and natural one at
the juneture at which it fouad itaelf and in the context of the international
and regional parametera then prevailing. It waa never the intentionthereby to
depart £rom the noma approved by the international eommunity to govern kts
intercourse and regulate its actions.
It wa8 also not intended thereby to harm the interests of particular
peoples. The Jamahiriyaha8 a profound belief that the real interests of al1
peuples of the Earth are sne and the aame, and it concedes that they have an
equal right to contribute to building a better future for rnankind as part of a
philosophy of human brotherhood and the unity of the hiiman race eombined with
respect for distinctive characteriatic8 and particular identities.
on this basis, tibya éndeavours in al1 eineerity and earnestness to promote
linka of friendshipand cooperationwith al1 nations and peoples without
distinctian or discrimination. It does not eonsider itself to be in a state of
confliet ar emity with any country that respects its eovereignty and its
freedom to pursue the plicy that accordswith an outlook and interests of its
own that do not violate the freedom and intereste af others.S/26500
English
Page 4
Despite the legitimate reservations the Jamahiriya entertains with regard
to Security Council resolution 748 (1992) and deepite ita objection to those of
its provision8that violate domeatic and international law and are in diseord
with the estabrished custamary noms in the field of internationalplitics, the
Yamahfriyahao expreased ita intention and demonatrated its readineea by both
word and deed to end this dispute and to eooperate with the Security Council and
the Secretary-Gsneral of the United Nations with a view to settling the conflict
and, indeed, turning a new page in its relationswfth the three Western States
that have placed thefneelvee in an adversarial positionwkth regard to the
Jamahiriya vithout objective juetification.
In this context, the Jamahiriya ha8 made a point of officially notifying
the Çecuritycouneil and the Secretary-General of the United Nations of its
readinee~to coopexate with the Ceuncil in a positive and constructive spirit,
not by yielding to dictatian and cornpulaion from any quarter but out of a desire
to remove a contrived and tranaitory dispute from the orbit af international
relations, and espeeially ao at a the when the international eomunity ia
endeavouring to ereate-a elimate for the establishment of a new kind of world
aolidarity imbued with a apirit of peace, cooperation and justice,
In our estimation, any internationalorder must be based on the firm
establiahrnent of principles of sovereigntyand plitical, econamic, social and
cultural independence, on conceding the tight of al1 peoples, great and amall,
rich and For, to develop their eocieties, on reepect for human rights and on
strengthening the foundationa of democracyin the way that each people chooses
and that it deems appropriate to its own cireumstancea and situation.
Tu that end, the Secretary of the General People's Committee for Foreign
Liaison and International Cooperatkon addreaeed to you a number of letters, and
WB speeifieallyrecall thoae dated 9 Zanuary 1992, 27 Pebruary 1992,
14 May 1992, 19 July 1992, 9 August 1992, 14 Auguet 1992, 21 August 1992 and
8 July 1993, in which he notified you af the meaeures taken by the Jamahiriya
nith regard to organizations and individual8 engaqed in activities characterized
as terroriem. Theae measures included the severance of any contacts with such
clements, refrainingfrom providing them with any asoietance and the closure of
the campa they had been uaing in any way,
The Secretary for Farsign Liaison also requeated you to dispatch a
technical migaion to verify Libya" cornpliance with the reaolution and with
thoae obligations that it beara, togetber with the internationalconmiunity, for
the repudiation of terrotism, To iti eurpriee, however, the Jamahiriya reeeived
no reeponae from the security Council or the Secretariat of the United Nations
ta thie logical and apontaneousoffer.
The failvre to keep the question under caneiderationand the abandonment of
the idea of eending a mission to verify Mplementation of the resolution waa a
poaition that we interpreted at the tim, and that we still interpret,as
meaning that the Seeurity Council was persuaèed that the Jamahiriya had carried
out all of the meaeures entailed by the reeolution.
Despite the foregoing,we renew the invitation-toyou promptly ta dispatch
the misaion in question. Englieh
Page 5
The Jamahirlya ha8 expreased ite readinese to reach an acceptable formula
for the irnplementation of the other provisions of the seeolution, andi as you
axe aware, it ha8 taken initiativesto approach the States that have adopted an
adveraarial stancetowards it.
For al1 of the faregoing reaeone, beause of a conviction that intentions
are worthy, seeking to manlfest a aincere desire to cooperate and out of respect
for internationallaw, the position of the Jamahiriya ha8 been eharaeterizedby
aagacity, as the world may testify. The Jamahiriyahad thue been expecting, as
it ha8 every right to expect, that the three Çtatea and the Seeurity Council
would take equkvalent etepa ta end a dispute that hae no aound historieal or
cultural basis .
It waa, however, moet regrettablysurprised when the three States isaued a
joint deelaration on 13 Auguat 1993 in whieh they claire that Libya hie not
diseharged its obligations. In light of al1 of the foregoing, Libya feels duty
bound, as a law-abiding State Member of the United Nationa, to place on record
the following pointa:
1. THE POLfCY OF DOUBLE STANDARDS
1. At the present delieate juncture in whieh the international eommunity fknda
itselfi it is aatonishing that the United Nations, or the activist Powere in it,
should employ two different meaaures or adopt a mode of procedure in whieh the
application of double standards ha8 the upper hand. It changea the policy it
pursues and the rulea it applies with the party being addressed, in the sense
that it deaka with partieular State~ with firm resolve and pursues a policy of
indiffereneetowards States that have eommittedcrimes and offenses hundrede of
timee worse than those attributed to othera.
Libya ie of the vkew - one shared by al1 third-world countries - that thie
policy will indisputably undermine the confidence of peoples in the Organization
and In the new world ordet and the valuee that it proelaims and invokes. We
have no need to refes to the caeea that demonstratethat a policyof double
atandards ha8 been pursued in recent years.
2. The double standards embraeed by the Seeurity Council have led to a duality
in the way matteri are taken up and a selectlvity in the' way they are handled,
thereby violating the rules of juatice and equity on which international law ia
based and the provisions of the Charter of the United Natkon~.
3. At a th when, on an important issue, eponaorship ie offered to and direct
negotiationaare impoeed on the Palestiniane and Iarael, the partiee coneerned
refuge to ait down and negotiate with the Jamahiriya. Why do theee same parties
refuee to adopt the method of direct negotiationa to resolveal1 their
differencea with the Jamahiriya?
4. On the nkght of 15 Apxil 1986, the Great Jamahiriya waa subjeeted to
unprovoked armed military aggreasionaimed against the life of
Colonel Muammar Qaddafii Leader of the Reoolution, the membets of his farnily and
other innocent and defencekess pergons and carried out by a great Power that is
a permanent mernberof the Security Council.SJ26500
Engliah
Page 6
Despite that aggreesion and its persistence in the fonn of an eeonomie
embargo, and despite the fact that it wae in breach of international law, the
Security Council did not adopt a stance condemning the use of foree against an
independent savereign State and a Mernber of the United Nations.
5. There ia eagernese for the implementation of Seeurity couneil resolutions
relating to the imposition of sanction8 on the Jamahiriya, but no eimilar
eagernese for the implementationof the dozens of reeolution~ adopted by the
aame Council on the question of Palestine,
Why is there ao much atrees on the Lplementation of reaolution 731 (1992),
while the implementationof reeolutions 425 (1978) and 799 (1992) ia ignosed?
fsrael ha8 praceeded to implement resolution 799 (1992), requiring the hediate
retutn of the deporteee, in the manner it eaw fit, and the Seeurity Couneil hes
had no objection to make.
In relation to resolution 731 (1992), why is the Jamahiriya not treated as
Israel was treated in the matter of the implementation of resolution 799 (1992)P
Doee this not constitute discriminationin the way Membera of the United
Nations are treated? knd can it not be regarded as the application af two
different standards by the body that ha8 partieular reaponsibilityfor the
maintenance of aeeurity?
6. Would the United States of America and the United Kingdom agree and woukd
they give officia1 undertakings to accede ta a sequest from the Great Jamahkriya
in the event that the Libyan judieialauthoritiee were to aeek to question and
bring to trial nationale of those eountriea who planned and participated in the
murder of innocent eitizene in the arrned aggressianof 19861 Similarly, what
possibility is there of the extradition of those who undertook the trainingof
criminal elements who have committedrnurder and sabotage in the territory of the
Great Jamahiriya and those reaponsible for the forcible abduction of Libyan
nationale from Chad?
7. Aa a result of the sanctions imposed by the Seeurity Couneil under
resolution 748 (1992) and of the prohibition on the aupply to Libya of
replacementparts for aircraft for purposes of maintenance, an aircraft of
Libyan Arab Airlines, flight nuder 1103, crashed on an interna1 Elight from
Benghazi to Tripoli in 1992 taking the lives of 157 innocentpraona.
The Jamahiriya, on the grounds of mere suspicion of two praone whaae guilt
has not been eetabliahed,has sustainedlossee of more than 3 billion dollars
and ha8 lost the lives of 530 innocentpeople owingta the ehortage of vaccines,
in travel-related mishapa and because of other difficultie~.
8. The Jamahiriya ie aetoniahed at the insietence of the three States on
acting in the frarnewark of Chapter VI1 of the Charter of the United Nations wkth
regard to incidents in which the proxhate or saute involvement of any Libyan
elements has not been established. At the same time, the provisions of
Chapter VI1 are not appliedin dealing with the State of Iarael, whieh eomkts
crimes and atroeitieathat are condetnned by the entire international eonimunity
and are incompatible with the moat elementarynoms of law and legitimacy. S/26500
English
Page 7
II. THE LEGAL POSITION (DOMESTIC AND INTERNATIONAL)
ON THE QUESTION OF EXTiUDTTION
ft is perhaps auperfluous to tecall that the requesta from the Statee in
question for the extradition of the two suspects holding the eitizenehip of the
country from which extradition ie requested meet with many legal obstaclee, th@
moat significant of whieh can be summarized as follows:
1. Article 1, paragraph 3, af the Charter of the United Nation8 etatee that
one of the Purposea of the United Nations is "To achieve international
coopration in eolving international problems of an economkc, social, cultural,
or humanitariancharaeter, and in promoting and encouragkng respect for human
righte".
It ia clear that the Organization ie committed to the application of
this text, and it ig therefore neceseary to give preeedenee to human rights over -'
al1 other eonaiderations. World Pace san be achieved, aceording to the United
Nationa philosophy, only by respect for human beinge.
In other words, justice at the domestic and international levels must not
be achieved at the coat of denying human rights.
Accordingly, in its coneern that legitimacy be respeeted, the Jamahiriya is
prepared to implement Seeurity Couneil resalutions whenever they are compatible
with the provisions of the Charter and of international law and can be
interpreted in eanformitywith them.
2. Security Council resolutions731 (1992)and 748 (1992) ean be legitirnized
and their implementationthus honoured only in light of their legitimacy
vis-à-vis the provisions of internationallaw and human rights legislation.
Under the proviaions of the Charter, the Security Council is legally
entrusted with a fundamental task that relates to respect for internationallaw,
not to its breach and violation.
How is it coneeivabls that the Jamahiriya should be obliged to extradite
ite national8 with al1 that that entails in terms of violating Article 2,
paragraph 7, of the Charter, which establiahes the prlnciple of ,non-intervention
in the domestic jurisdiction of Member States?
3. The two reeolutione, as a whole and in their varioue parcs, run into a
number of problematieailegal iasuee raised $y the matter of Libyan State
sovereignty. The moat aignificantof them are:
(a) The hpermiaaibklity of the extradition of a person holding
citizenship of the State (Libyan Penal and Criminal Procedure Code);
The absence of an agreement between the parties concerned governing
(b)
rulee of extradition;
Ic) The accession of the Jamahiriya to all of the international hurnan
rights eovenante prevente it from taking measures that may void hman rights
quarantees to a just and fair trial. S/26500
English
Page 9
freedom of peaples, and we are prepared to bear al1 the eoneequences of
aafeguarding the dignity of our nation and ite people as long as we believe that
we are acting within the bounds of law and legitimaey.
8. The Jamahiriya eannot aceept offense tu the dignity of the Libyan people or
any of its members, beeauae it le of the view that its basic miseion ia to
proteet that dignity and impose respect for it.
On the baaia of the foregoing, the Jamahirkya refusea to cornpel two of ite
nationale to extradite themaelve~to a foreign country that adopta a hostile and
adverearial stance towards their own and rendera a prior verdict on their guilt
before kt ie eaéablishedat a judicLaLtrial providing adequate guarantees and
sheltered from political or cultural chauvinism.
9. In view of the faet that there is no agreement in fqrce between the
Jamahiriya and the United States or the United Kingdom for the extradition of
offenders, Libya is unable to compel the two suapecta to extradite themselvee to
either country, It rernains for thern to decide by their own free will whether
they will preeent themaelvea to the legal juriedictionof either a£ the two
countr Les.
III, SUPPOSITION TKAT THE TWO SUSPECTS WILL CHALLENGE THE CEIARGES
AGAfNST THBH AND ACREE TO APPEAR BEFOREA FOREIGN JWRISDICTION
1. It may be possible forthe twosuspects to take the initiative of
proceeding to a foreign country, without speffication or exclusion, and appear
before the judicial authoritiea tc challenge the unjust charge against them and
aecure their acquitta1 in a just and fair trial unaffected by political
influences and media eampaignsthat would prejudiee the fakrness of the trial
and place it outside the domain of Law and legal guarantees. it may be
appropriate for us to notify yau that the two iuepecta have informed us that
they have recently appointed a tearnof attorneys in Scotland and England. They
have reqÿested thie team, together with the attorneyswho repreaentedthem in
the United States in the past, to take the necessarymeaeuree to challengethe
legal cornpetence of either country to provide them wLth a fair trial.
The twa auspeeta baae thia move on the obvious faet that there has been
wideepread advance media eondemnation,which would ma- it impbaaible to select
an impartial and uninfluenced jury in either country.
It goes without saying that in the evsnt thia move suceeeds it will
automaticallyimply the removal of any baeke for strengthening the sanctions
impoaed on the Jamahisiya. Strengtheningthe sanctions would necesaarily brlng
about the prejudgement of mattera pending before the judieial authoritiea in the
two eountries, and this would further prejudice the position of the two
suspecta, who have already eustained mueh ham, and vkolate their human rights.
Through theix representatives,the two suspects have raiseà a number of
questions, and we subrnit them hefeunderon their behalf in the hope that the
answess pravided to them will have a rols in théir adoption of a positive
deciaian.S/26500
English
Page 10
Aseuming that theix appearance beforea foreign juriedictionis possible
and that it will take place and be on their own reaponaibility and not that of
the Libyan Stata" what are the answers to the questions set forth hereunder,
which rnay be provided by the two Statee concerned and the Security Council
directly to the JamahirFya or through the Ssesetary-GeneraL of the United
Nat iona?
'Are the anewere to the questions posed to be coneidered a5 legal and
political guaranteee provided to the two suepects and thelr defence team?
1. Does the Sfate concernecl to which the two suspects would proceed in
order to appear before a juet and fair tribunal undertake to conduct
the trial in a legal framework removed £romthe influence of political
f aetora?
2. Does thie State undertake not to conduet an inquiry wFth the two
aeeueed outaide the purview of the court 80 that the two suepects are
not aubjected to questioning by other ageneiss euch as domestic or
foreign intelligence police?
3. Dcea the State undertake not to exert any physieal or mental pressure6
on the two suepcts wkile they are in detention durinq the trial?
4. Will the two suspects be guarantaedthat no question will be addreesed
to th= and no measures teken other than in the preaence of the
defence team appinted by them?
5. Does the State concerned undsztake to allow repreeentativeaof the
defence team, the Secretariat of the United Nations, the secretariat
of the Laague of Ar& Statea and the eecretariat of the Arah Lawyers'
Union to viiit the suspects at thelr place of detentionduring the
trial in arder to ascertain that th- have not been eubjected to
torture, preseure or eoerefon?
.. 6. Does the State undertake not to offsr nny inducemente or speeific
deala to the two euspects that rnaytend to alter the truth, or to
rendet a reduced sentenceor eonsider them State'a witnesses if they
should make certain admiseLoneZ
7. Doea the State undertake that na individual apart from its own
judisialofficials wilL participate In the reception of the two
suepecte and that, Ln any event, thie wfll take plaee only in the
presence of repressntatives of the defenee team?
8. How will the defence team for the two suspects ascertain the
auitabilityof the persone proposed ao prospectivemenbers of the jury
that may deeide the faete without prejudgement and uninfluenced by the
images imprinted on their minde?
9. Does the State undertake that the trial will be in publie and that the
two suapecta shall have the right to defend themeelves, directly or
through the defence team, in al1 atages of coneiderationof the case? 'S/26SQO
Englksh
Page 11
10. What would happen should the jury be unable to reach a verdict of
guilty or not guilty?
11. Doee the State undertake that the trial will be reatricted ta the
incidents eonnected with Pan Arnerican flight 103 and will not go
beyond them to include other incidents or other charges?
12. Does the State undertake to allow the two auepeeta to leave ita
territory and rsturn to their humes on the aame day a verdict of
innocent is renderedor on completionof executionof the penalty
against them ahould their guilt be provedl In this event, and in the
event of a judgement for compensation that they are unable to pay,
there shall be no liability for the Jamahiriya,whieh will not have
been on trial, and thus its aeeets may not be placed at riak.
. .
13. Doei the State concernedundertake not to extradite the twa suapecte
to another State under any pretext and for whatever reaeon?
14. Does the State undertaketo ensure the two suspects the right to
requeet a tetrial, if the law applied therein permit8 retrial, or to
appeal againet the verdict?
15. Suppoeing that the prosecuting authoritieswiahed to prefer charges
against other peraons in the aame case or to prefercharges againet
the same two euspectsin respect of other incidents,would the United
States of Americe and the United Kingdom undertake to accept that
conaideration of such freah charges should take place outside the
framewosk of Security Council reeolutiona731 (1992) and 748 (1932)?
16. In the absence of a bilateral agreement between the parties that
regulates relationshipr between dlfferent legal systeme, hou can
proeedures be establiahedto enable the two to appear befors a foreign
jurisdiction?
17. What legal, socialand cultural guarantees are there to ensure just
and fair investigation procedures and trial, for example guarantees
&lating to the non-subjeetian of the tua to police procedures,
respect for their cultural and religious identity, regard for health
conditions and the facilitationof daily communication with their
families?
18. What Is the role of the Seerstary-General of the United Nations and of
the United Nations Ftself in determining the proeedures for the
appearance of the two euapect~ before a foreign jurksdietion and the
aforementioned guarantaee relating to the investigation and trial?
19- The internationalcovenantsrelating to human righte legislation have
wkthout exception set forth the judicialobligations that States
assume in order to ensure respect for the rights they embody, and they
have done sa by stipulating them explicitly. Most of them tefer to
the obligation of al1 States:SJ26500
Engli~h
Page 12 '
"To eneure that any person shall have an effective legal or
adrnini~trative rernedy in the event of any violation of the righte
and fzeedorns establishedin the covenante, notwithstanding that
the violation ha8 been eommitted by persona acting in an official
capaeity ,"
The slght of litigation ie one of the most important mechanisme for
ensuring hurnan rights. ït is, indeed, the mat important of all,
piinee rights have no meaningwithout the poseibility of litigation to
eompel respect for them.
At al1 event~, the matter requkres that negotiations be conducted
under the auepiees of the Security Council, represented in the person
of the Secretary-General or hie representative,at United Nations
Headquartere in New York or at Geneva, in order to draw up the
necesBaryterne and guarantees for the inquiry and trial pracedures.
There should ale0 be negotiationa among the proaecuting and trial
authoritiee, in any country satiefactory to the two aecused, in the
preeence of their legal representative and under the supervision of
the Secretary-Generalof the United Natione, to estabiiah the terms
neeeesary for their voluntary appearanee.
IV. CLARIFICATIONS AND GUARANTEES REQUESTEDBY THE JNIRIYA
Aa a Wer of the international eommunityand a State that respects
international law and the obligation8 stemming from the Charter, the Jamahiriya
deems itself obliged to pose a set of questions that revolve around the legal
and politicab guaxantees that the two States or the Security Council, direetly
or through the Seeretary-General of the United Nations, may undertake.to
provide.
The guaranteea and clarification8 that the Great Jamahiriya Fs reguesting
are sueh aa to aseiet in facilitatingthe task of applying national and
international law and to bring the queetion in diepute to a definitive end.
With respect to theee questions, we should like to address the following
points:
1. Do the two States coneerned undertake to request the Security Council to
lift the sanctions imposed on Libya undet resolution 748 (1992) immedkately on
arriva1 of the two suspecte in the jurisdietionof the court that wiLl consider
the case, without awaiting the completion of the trial proceedinga or the
rendering of a verdict?
2. Do the two States vndertake not to clah that Libya has not dischargedits
obligations, particularly with respect to those entailed by reeolution
748 (1992) and particularlyin the field of terrori~m in aeeordaneewith the
text of paragraph 2 of that reaolutionl
3. Should either of the two States have reservatione in thie regard, what
precisely in their view is required of the Janahiriya for it to demonstratethat
it ha8 discharged this obligation in full? S/26500
English
Page 13
4. Do the two Statea undertake to enter into dialogue with the Jamahiriya on
the normalization of relatione and the elirnknatio nf the remainingfactors that
cloud them imraediately on arriva?, of the two su~pects in the jurisdiction of the
court at which the trial wiil take place?
5, Do the two States agree to cooperatewith the Jamahiriya iwaediately on
commencement of the trial in adopting the necessary measures with the Libyan or
foreign elements soncerningwhieh the Jamahiriyahae evidence of their
involvement in sabotage or terrorist activities that jeopardize the intereste of
the Libyan State or of ite nationalal
6. Do the two Statea agree that, after the appearance of the two suapeets
before the court, the role of the Seeurity Couneil shall be reatrieted to the
lifting of sanctions and ahall not extend to monitoringthe progrees of the
trial proceedings or any other aspects?
7. It is clear from a readiag of Seeurity muncil resolution 731 (1992) that
it accuaea the Great Jamahiriya, in a general and vague rnanner, of acte of
terrorism and assistanceto terrorism.
Assistance by the Great Jamahiriyato certain kiberation organizations was
provided on the basie of Our belief in freedom and the right of peoples to self-
determination. This ia Ln conformity with the reealutkoneadopted by the United
Nations General Asseml>ly at auccesaiveaeasione on the need to aupport
liberation movements and ta protnote the right of people8 to self-determination.
In the absence of an international agreement defining the concept and
bounds of terroriem, certain actionsrnay be interpreted and cooperation with
certain liberation rnovements may be characterizedas terroriam by eome parties
without there being any baais in international law for doing 80.
In thia conneetion, the Great Jarnahirkya has deelared on a number of
occasions and in numerous cornunicationsthat it has implemented resolution
731 (1992) a8 it relates to the charge againet it having eupported and assisted
groupe suspeeted of engagkng in tersorist activities. The letters and
atatements of the Great Jamahiriya on this matter have documented this fact to
the United Natione,
As an additionalmanifestation of good faith on the part of the Great
Jamahiriya, in its appreciatlonof the sole of the Security couneil, and in ite
deaire to cooperate with the United Nations and ita Secretary-General in
prmdting the norme of international cooperationand world peace, the Great
Jmahiriya regueatedthat a United Nations mission be dispatehed to vetify its
implementation of resolution731 (1992) ae it relates to terrorism, but this
request na8 not granted. Do the two States concerned undertake not to
characterize the Jamahiriyaas a State that supporte groupa whoee activities are
said to canetitute terroriem?
8. In theis declaration of 13 August 1993, the three States reiterate that
they have no hidden agenda againat the Jamahiriya, meaning that they have no
intention of intervening in the interna1 affairs or interiering with the
political and econornic choices of the Libyan Arab people, and that, on the5/26500
English
Page 14
conttary, upon implementationby the Great Jamahiriya of resolution 731 (1392)
the conditions would be met for the lifting of the sanctions impoeed.
To what extent are the three statee prepared to affirm that thks ie a
coinmitment they will fulfil within the Security Council on discuesion of the
lifting of the measurea of compulsion againat the Great Jamahiriya?
9. The Jamahiriya understanda from the deelaration of the three States issued
on 13 August 1993 that it contains a modification of the demande aet forth in
the deelaration of 27 Ndvember.1991 contained in document S/23308. Wfll the
appearanee cf the two euepeeta on their own initiativebe regarded as eornplianee
with the requests of these States and lead to the immediate lifting of the
compulsory aanctione imposed?
The Jamahiriya hopee ta reeeive your reply to these question0 ae quiekly ae
possible 80 that it may conimunicate it to the legal repreaentativeaof the two
suspects before they make their decision on the mattar and go that the
Jamahiriya may determine ita future stsps at the proper the and without delay.
In conclusion, we requeet you to have this letter eirculated as a document
of the Security Council.
We muet eonvey to you our slneere grafitudeand appreciation for your
active role in safeguardinginternationallegitimacy, promoCi,ng the prineiplea
of justice and law and protecting international peace and securkty. Exhibit 30
United States-cable dated 22 September 1993 £rom Washington, D,C.
to United StatesMission to the United Nations, New York OEPMM~~T QP STATE SIFPCI~ =-~,~w/G&-
(;fEXCISE -.-
(J DENY tN PART - -3.Jdf. ;1
. ,c4,ad
-OA Eremotions .- .- { 1 DDWi4Gi;75f2 a-*.. -,s?
93 STATE 289060
O 2204Slf SEP 93
FM SECSTATE WASHK
JO USMISSION USUN NEW YORK IHMfDfATE
1NF0 AHEMBASSY LONDON' IMHEOI ATE
AHEMaASSY PARIS IHHEDIAT E
DOJ UASHOC IMMEDI ATE
OEPT OF TRIEASURY #ASHOC PRZORITY
AnEHEASSY CAIRO PRIORITY
- STATE 289060
-. ,
SUBJECT: PAN AH 103: USG ANSHERS TO LIBYAN QUESTIONS
.
-
1 -4- - €NT1 RE i EXTI
2- USUN fS LNSFRUCPED fO SHARE THE FOLLOWING ANSNEUS70
LIBYA'S LEGAL QUESTLDHS YfTH UKUN. THE FRENCH
MISSION AND Ut4 LEGAt AOYISER FLEISCHHAUERi r
------------------- J
LAI THE RESPONSES TO YOUR PUESTIONS AS SET OUT BELOMI
REFLECT THE LAUS OF THE UNZTEO STATES GWERMING ALL
CRIHlNkL PROCEEDINCS- AS SUCHI ANY TRIAL OF THE
DEFENDANTS IN THE UNITED STATES nIu BE CONWCTED IN
ACCORDANCEWïTH THEH. NO ASSLRANCES BEYOFlD THAT ARE TO
BE INFERREO ÇROH ANY 3F THE ANSWERS SET FORTH BELDWi
ZB* A TRIAL ON THE XNOICTHENT ïY THE UiS- MILL BE
- CONOUCTED IN THE UNITED STATES UISTUf CT COURT FOR THE
OISTRXCT COURT FOR THE OI STRICT OF COCUH0f A- THE TRIAL
JUDGEv LfKE ALL YIS. OISTRICT COURT JUOGES AN0 AS
PRQVTgED FOR IN THE US CONSTITUTION+ IS COMPCETELY
TNnFPFNRFkT FRnH THF 2OtlTlCAL 3RANCHES OF THE 05/30/95 190547 PRINTER: HI
93 STATE 289060
* t 1-
GQVERNHENT AND 1s NOT SUBJECT JO ANY FORM OF POLITICAL
INFLUENCE- PURSUANT TO THE US CQNSTITUTIONw IN ALL
CRIHIHAL PROCEEOING Sq ALL ACCUSE0 PERSONS HAVE THE RlGflT
U
r-L
PAGE 03 STATE 289060 2294512
TO A SPEEDY TRIAL BY AN IMPARTIAL AND PUBLIC JURY; T0 BE
CONFROPdTEDWITH WITNESSES AGALtlST THEH; fO HAVE
COMPULSORY PROCESS FOR OSTAINING WITNESSES IN THElR
FAVUR; AND TO HAYE FiifASSISTANCE Of COUNSEL FOR THEIR
DEFENSE*
3. THE OEFENDAMTS HAVE THE ABSOLUTE RLGHT TO CHOOSE HOT
TO HfET OR COHHUNICATE WITH ANYùNE FROH THE GWERNHENT
BEFORE TRIAL INCLLJDINGANYONE FROH THE PROSECUT IOMt f HE
POLICEt OR US OR FOREIGN INTELLIGENCE AGENTS. AYY
INTERVIEW Of THE OEFENDANTS BY REPRESENTATIVES OF THE
GOVERNMENT WWLO QNLY BE CONOUCT€0 WITH DEFENDANTS '
FREELY GIVEN CONSENT* THE DEFEr40ANfSe ATTORNEYS HAVE
THE RIGHT ?O BE PRESENT OURING SUCH QUESTZONING SHOULO
THE DEFENDANTS REQUEST THEfR PRESENCE*
4. THE GOVERNHENT RESERVES THE RIGHT TO ExeLaKE wITH THE
DEFENDAidfjr IN ACCORU WITH eSTABCZSHEO CRIVINAL dUSTICE
PROCEOURESw THE POSSIeILITY OF FURNISHING INFORMAT ION
COKERNING THE BOHBENG IN EXCHANGE FOR LIHITTNG THE
DURATION OF IHPRISONHENTi fT WJUtQ NOT* HOWEVERw EXERT
ANY FORB OF COfRtlON UPON THE OEFENOANTS IN ORDER TO
If4OUCESUCH COOPERATION OR TO INOUCE A CONFESSION-
S- AS EXPLAINED ABOVE* UNLESS THE DEFENDANTS
SPECIFICALLY ASSEMTTQ I Tt THEY CANNOT BE QUESTfONEO BY
AGENTS OF THE -UNITED STATES IN THE ABSENCE OF COUNSEL*
tIKEHfSE+ IT 1S fMPERNTSSIBtE UNDER UfdITED STATES LAW
FOR THE POLICE TO CONOUCT A LfhlEUP FOR THE PURPOSE5 OF
IDENTIFICATION HITHOUT THE PRESENtE OF COOHSEL*
L
-
PAGE O4 STAff 289060 Z204512
61 THE DEFZNOANTS' ATf ORNEYS HILL HAVE FREE ACCESS TU
THEM FOR THE PURPOSE OF PREPARfNG A OEFENSE. DTHER
PEOP~ HAY HAVE ALSESS TO THE ACCUSEQ IN ACCORD WITH
ESTABtfSE O POLICY ON VZSITATION SET BY f HE INSTITUTION
WHERE THEY HILL BE HOUSEO.
?a AS EXPLAINMt PURSUANT TO ESTABLISHEQ CRIHXFIAL
JUSTICE PROCEDURESI THE OEFENDANTS HILL ~VE A RIGHT
THROUGH THEIR ATTDRtdEYSiTU REACH AN AGREEMENT UfTH THE
PROSECUTfClN WHICH CDaO BENEFIT THEH- SUCH BENEFfTS
CüüLO BE CONTINGENT UPON PROVIOfNG TRUTHFUL XHFORHATION
CONGERYLHG THE 00HBIMG INVE ST KGAON TQ THE GCIVERWENT -
81 UNDER US LAM* OEFENSE CUUNSEL MAY BE PRESENT MtEtC THE
DEFENDANTS ARE TAKEN INTQ UNITED STATES CusrmY- THE
OEFENOANTS HWLO THEN BE PROCESSE0 BY THE U-SI HARSHALS
THE F81 AND TAKEH. PURSUANT TU RULE 51 FEOERAC RULES 0!5/30/95 100547 PRIYTER: HI
93 STATE 289060
L /-
OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE* "HITHOUT UNNECESSARY DELAY BEFORE
THE NEAREST AVAILABLE FEOERAL HAGISTRATE-"
9- PURSUANT TO US LAW* QEFENSE GOUNSEL MILL BE ABLE fO
PROVIDE QUESTIONS TO THE TRIAL JUOGE WHO HUST PUESTION
EACH PROSPECTIVE JUROR fOK THE PURPOSE OF ENSURING THAT
HE DR SHE 15 IHPARTIAL- DEFENSE COUNSEL HAY THEY SEEK
fO ELIMZqATE FROH THE JURY POTENTIAL JURDRS WHO* FROH
THEIR RESPONSES TO THE QUESTTONS ASKEO BY THE JUOGEq
APPEAU fO LACK THE NECESSARY IMPARTIALITY*
10- UNOER THE UtiITEOSTbTES COHSTITUTION. ALL DEFEKOAYTS
HAVE THE PLGHT 10 BE REPRESENTED BY COUNSEL WRING ACC
-
cmat
PAGE 05 STATE 289060 2204512
PREf RIAL AND TRIAL PROCEEDINGS* THEY HILL ALSO HAVE
THE RIGHI- TO A PuatIt TRIAL, TU CONFRONT AND
CROSS-EXA#IME W1TNESSES AND fO PRESENT A OEFENSE* IN
PRESENTfNG THAT OEFENSE* THEY HAVE THE RfCHT fO REQUIRE
THE PRESENCE OF WITNESSES WHO HAVE RELEVANT EVIDENCE-
11- Ii THE EiIENT THAP THE JURY IS OEdDLOCKEDt THE TRIAL
JUDGE CAN DECLARE A MISTRI AL AM0 THE DEFENOAMTS CAM BE -I
RETRI €0.
12- AT TRIAL Of THIS CASE, THE PROSECUTION CAN ONLY
PRESENT EVIDENCE THAT 15 RELEVANT TO THE CHARGES IN T~E
INOICTMElriTi THE SUSPECTS CURRENTLY AUE OhLY CHARGE0FOR
THEIR INVGLVEHENT IN THE PAN AH 103 BOHBINGi NO US LAY
WOJLD PROHIBIT THEfR 0EIMG CHARGEG HITH OTHER CRfMES
UITHIN US JURISDICTLON SHWtP SUFFICIEN? EYlOENCE
WARRANT ITt NOR WDULD THE SUSPECTS BE IMMUNE FROY
PROSELUTION FDR CRIMES THEY HZGHT COMMIT AFTR COMING fO
THE US-
13- It4 THE EVENT THE OEFENDANTS ARE FOUNO "NOT GUILTY"
BY A JURYt THEY HILL BE RECEASED FROH UNITED STATES
CUSTODY WITHWT WWE DELAY. IN THE EVEHr OF A FENDING
Of "HOT GUILTYn. A FEBERAL CRI HfNAt COURT CANNOT IMPOSE
A JUOGHENT OF MONET ARY COMPENSATI ON UPON THE OEFENOANTS
NOR CAN IT IMPOSE SUCH A JUOGMENT AGAINST A FORE1GN
GOYERNHE~T~ (('THISODES NOT AFFECT TME FZEQUIREHEN OTN ,'
LIBYA U!dDER SCR 731 TO PAY APPROPRIATE COMPENSAflON IF
TM ACCUSED UER€ FOUNO GUItfY OU IF LIBYAN LNVObVEHfffT
WERE OEHONSTRATED IN 50HE WAY-) )
-C
C-1 AL
PAGE 06 STATE 289060 229451Z
14. NO- NO TRANSFER OF THE DEFENDANTS* HOWEVERt WOULO
BE NAOE TO ANY OfHER GWNTRY EXCEPT IN STRICT CONFORHITY
WITH THE LAW5 OF THE UNIT €0 Sf ATESi
15- Itd THEEVENT THE OEFENOANTSARE CONVICTEOv THEY HAVE
AN AUT(filATLKIGMT Tg PUUSE AN APPEAL- IFi OY APQEAL.
THE COURT DETERPIINE!jTHAT THE TRIAL MAS UEFECTfVE OU€ TO
A CFCAC ERRURi THE T)EFENDANTS CAN BE RETRIED IN A 05/33/95 la0547 PRINTER: HI
93 STATE 289060
7 / -y
PROCEEQXNG FREE OF THE OEFECT IDENTIFIEB BY THE
APPELLATE CUURT.
16. THE US HA5 ALREADY AFFIRME0 ITS WlLCINGNESS 70
SUSPEND THE PROVISIONS OF RESOLUTION 748 UPON SURRENOER
OF THE THO SUSPECfSi IF THE OTHE3 REQUIREHENTS OF 131
AND 748 WfRE FULFILLEDi THE SANCTIONS WOULO BE LIFTED
ENTIRELY; IF THEY WERE NOTt THE SUSPENSION WOULO BE
TERHXNATEOi WE NOTE THAT ONE OF THESE REQUIREHEYTS.
iNCaR PORATEO BY REFERENCE INTU RESOLUTI ON 731t OBLIGATES
LTBYA TO ALLOW FULL ACtESS TQ ALt WITNESSES* DOCUMENTS
AND OtHER MATERTAC EVIOEWCE RELATING fD "THIS CRIME-"
IF EVIDENCE QF LIBYAN fNVOLVEMEMT IN OfHER ACT5 OF
T ERRORISH RESULTED FROH THIS T?.IAL* THE SECURITY COUNCIL
WOULD PAVE THE OPTISN OF OEALZNG WITH THE NEH SITUATION-
17* THE PROCEDURES GDYERNfNG THE DEFEHOAN3Sm APPEARANCE
AND TRIAL WICL BE THOSE BY GHïCH ALC TRIALS IN COURTS OF
THE UiJlTfD STATES ARE COrirDUCTfO* THESE PROCECURES 00
NOT OEPENO UPON NOR APE THEY SUBJECT TU VARIATIOirl Oh:THE
BASIS OF THE OEFENOANTS Y-
PAGE 07 $TATE 289060 2204512
18, THE CCINSTLTUTION AN0 LAWS OF TUE UNITEO STATES
GUARANTEE THAT THE OEFENDANTS MILL BE TREATED FAIRLY AND
HUHANELY BY THE COURTSt LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS+ AND
THOSE UESPONSISLE FOR THE OEFENOANTS' OETENTIOYUHILE
bWAITING TRI AL*
19. AS EXPLAINED ABOVE* THE LAUS OF THE UNITED STATES
ARE THE EXCLUSIVE BASIS GOVERNTNG THE PROCEWUES FOR THE
OEFENDANTS' TRIAL AND ANY INVESTIGATION*
20. AS EXPLAINEOi THE CONSTITUTION AND LAhS OF THE
UNITE0 STATES GOVfRN THE DEFECSDANTSm TRIAL RICHT4 IN ANY
CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGCDNDUCTED IN THE COURTS OF THE
UNITEO STATES REGAROLESS OF THE DEFENDANT' 5
NATIONALITY- ((THESE PROVIOE GUARANTEES OF OEFENDANTS*
Rf GHTS AH1CH EXCEEO THOSE PROVIOEO BY INTERNATION AL
-HUHAN RI WTS AGREEMENTS) )
-L
C U L
PAGE CM STATE 289060 22045 12PAGE 5 Exhibit 31
Letterdated 1 October 1993 from the Permanent Representative of
the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya to the UnitedNations
addressedto the Secretary-General
(United Nations Document S/26523; 1 Qctober 1993) S/26523
1 october 1993
ENGLISH
ORIGINAL: WIC
LETTER DA= 1 OCTOBLR 1993 FROH THE PERMANENT REPRESENTATIVE
OF THB LIBYAN MUü JAHAHIRIYA Tû THE UNITED HATIONS ADDREÇSED
TU THE SECRBTARY-OEMERU
With reference to the two lettere from the Seeretary of the General
People's Cornmitteefor Foreign Liaison and International Cooperation which wers
sent to you on 29 Septamberand 1 Octokr 1993 respectively, 1 shauld be
grateful if you would have th- eirculated as a document of the Security
Counci 1.
(Sianed) Ali Ahmed ELHOUDERI
Permanent Representative S/26523
Englieh
Page 2
Letter dated 29 September 1392 from the Secretan
of the General Peo~le's Cormittee for ForeLan
Liaimon and International cooperation of the
Libvan Arab Jarnahiriva
I received your letter dated 24 september 1993 which contains replies to
certain queetions whieh were raised in the letter which we sent te you on
Il September 1993. X ehould like to expreasmy appreciation to you for the
apeed and objectivity of yaur reply and for your recognition of our willingneee
to cooprate with you and te take positive and meaningful masuree.
f should lika to aseure you once again of Our determination to iettle al1
pending ieeuee with the countsiei concerned in ordet to improveour relatione
with al1 the countries of the world within a framework of dialogue,
underetanding and cmperation on the baeia of the purposes and prineiplea of the
Charter of the United Natione.
The replisa contained in your letter concern the queatione raiad and th.
clarification reguestd by the lawyersof the two euepecte but we are etill
awaiting the replies to the guestioneaekd and clarificationeought £rom the
tkee Western eountriee.
We have ment to the lawyeriof the two suepeeta the replie8 which you sent
to us. Far our part, we wish ta say that the aesurancee you have given us are
adequate and acceptable. A6 a State, and aftar theee aesurancee,nat only axe
we no longer oppoeed to the euapeet~going to trial, but we will encourage thmm
to do aa. We believe that there ia only one more atep which needs to be taken
to reeolve thia crieie whieh has lasted for yeare, namely to canvince the
auspcta, their families and their l&Wp~a to go to trial. For our part, ai m
have already aaid, we will encourage th- to do eo.
Re tc the diaamter of the IPPA 772 aireraft, we aseure you of Our full
willingneaa to cooperate with the c-tent French authoritias. in accordance
wlth the French dmda in relation to the investigation of this incident.
(Siund) Muetafa AUSWMTASSER
Secretary of the General Pemplm'i
mittee for Foreign Liaiaon and
Internat ional Cooperat ion Letter dated 1 October 1993 from the Secretam
of the ~enerax Peo~le'e cornittee for Foreiq
q
Libvan Arab Jamahiriva addreeaed to the
Secretarv-Generak
With reference to the letter 1 addreeeed to you on 29 sept-== 1993,
shopld like to eonfim that the replies you gave to the queetione raised by the
tm suspectsare adsquate and acceptable, and that the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya ia
encouraging the tW BuSpecto t0 appeat b8Eore the Seottieh courts.
~e a token af our gd will we are prepared to welcame a group of
iepreaentativee Erm the Scottish courta to see the efforts we are making, to
mt the two auepeeti, their familie8 and lnwyers and to contri-bute to the
deeiwed to convince them to appear before the Scottieh courts.
Rirthermore, 1 wish to aeaure you that wm will regpond to the French
=-este with the eame earneetneasand detemination we have ahown with reeprct
ta the American and British requests.
f sineerely hop that the three countriei will give nome acknowledgementof
Our earneitneea and our finndetemination to implant Security Couneil
reeolution 731 (1992). I also hop that the eountries conssrned will help to
create a favourable elimater devaid of any threat, ultimatum or esealation of
the aggravation of sanctions, and that thia will coma about prfot to the data
seheduleU for conaiderationof th% action taken on resolution 748.
In acting
thua, these countriea will ba halplng to bxLng ue to the final atage of ths Long
road oiiehave travelleà. There is no need to reeall that we reeeived knewere to
sam of our queetions on 28 Septlember 1993 and that anawere to the uther
queetione would help to createthia favourable elimate.
[si-@) Omar Muetafa 8LMUNTASSER
Secretary ef the General People'i
Coornittee for Foreign Lkaieon and
InternationalCooperation Exhibit 32
Resolution 883, United Nations Security Council,
3312th meeting, 11 November 1993
(UnitedNations Documents/~ES/883)1 UNITED
NATIONS s
1
Security Council
Distr.
GENERAL
S/RES/B83 (1993)
11 November 1993
RESOLUTION 883 (1993)
Adopted by the Securitv Council at its 3512th meetinq,
on 11 November 1993
The Securitv Council,
Reaffirminq its resolutione 731 (2992) of 21 January 1992 and 748 (1992) of
31 March 1992,
Deeply coneerned that after more than twenty months the Libyan Goverment
has not fully cornplied with these resolutions,
Determined to eliminate international terrorism,
Convinced that those responskble for acts of international terrarisrn must
be brought to justice,
Convineed also that the suppression of acts of internationalterrorism,
inciuding those in which States are directly or indirectly involved, is
esaential for the maintenance of international peaee and security,
Determininq, in this context, that the continued failure by the Libyan
Goverment to demonstrate by concrete actions its renunciation of terrorfçm, and
in particular Its eontinued failure fo respond fully and effectively to the
requests and decisions'in resolutions 731 (1992) and 748 {1992), eonstitute a
threat to international peace and security,
Takina note of the letters to the Seeretary-Generaldated 29 September and
1 Oetober 1993 from the Secretary of the General People's Cornittee for Foreign
Liaison and International Cooperation of Libya (S/26523)'and hie speech in the
General Debate at the forty-eighth session of the General Asaembly (A/48/PV.20)
in which Libya stated its intention to encourage those eharged with the bombing
of Pan An 102 to appear for trial in seotland and its willingness to eooperate
with the campetent French autherities in the case of the bombing of UTA 772,
Expresslnq its gratitude to the Secretary-General for the efforts he has
made pursuant to paragraph 4 of reçolution 731 (1992),
Reeallinq the right of States, under Article 50 of the Charter, to eonsult
the çecurity Council where they find themselves confronted with çpecial econornic
ariçing from the carrying out of preventive or enforcement measures,
problemç
93-62678 (E) J. -.S/RES/SS3 (1993)
Page 2
Actinq under Chapter Vïf of the Charter,
1. Demands once again that the Lkbyan Government comply without any
further delay with resolutions 731 (1992) and 748 (19925;
2. Decides, in order to secure cornpliance by the Libyan Goverment with
the decigions of the council, to take the following measures, which ehall corne
into force at 00.01 EST on 1 Deeember 1993 unle88 the Secretary-Ceneral bas
reported to the Couneil Ln the terms set out in paragraph 16 below;
3. Deeidee that al1 States in whkch there are funds or other financial
resources (including funds derived or generated £rom property) owned or
cantrolled, directly or indirectly, by:
(a) the ~overnment or public authoritiesof Libya, or
(b) any Libyan undertaking,
shall freese çuch funds and financial resourceç and ensure that neither they no=
any other funds and financial resources are made availabke, by their nationale
or by any persons within their territary, directly or indirectly, tw or for the
benefit of the Government or public authorities of Libya or any Libyan
undertaking, which for the purposes of thi8 paragraph, means any ~ommer~ial,
industrial or publie utility undertaking whieh is owned or controlled, directly
or indirectly, by
(i) the Goverment or public authorities of Libya,
. (ii) any entity, vherever located or organized, owned or controlled by (i),
or
(iii) any person identifked by States as acting on behalf of (i) or (ii) for
the purposes of this resolution;
4. Further decides that the measures irnposed by paragraph 3 above do not
apply to funds or other financial resources derived from the sale or supply of
any petroleum or petroleum produets, including natural gas and natural gas
produets, or agricultural produets or eomrnudities, originating in Libya and
exported therefrom after the tirne specified in paragraph 2 above, provided that
any eueh funds are paid into separate bank accounts exelusively for these funds;
5. Decides that al1 States shall prohibit any provision to Libya by their
nationale or from their territory of the items listed in the annex to this
resolution, as well as the provision of any types of equipment, supplies and
grante of licensing arrangements for the manufacture or maintenance of such
items ;
6. Further deeides that, in order to make fully effective the provisions
of resolution 748 (19921, al1 States shall:
(a) require the immediateand cemplete closure of al1 Libyan Arab Airlines
offices within their territoriesrS/RES/883 (1993)
Page 4
Il. Affims that nothing in thia resolution affecte Libya'e duty
eerupulously t~ adhere to al1 of its obligation6 concerning servicing and
repayment of its foreign debt;
12. Calls won al1 States, including Statee not'Hembere of the United
Nations, and al1 international organizatione,to aet 8trictly in accordance with
the provisions of the present resolution, notwithstanding the existence of any
righte or obligations conferred or irnposed by any internationalagreement or any
contract entered into or ony licence or permit granted prior to the effective
time of this resolution;
13. Reauests al1 States to report to the Secretary-General by
If January 1994 on the measuree they have Lnatituted for meeting the obligations
set out in pasagrapha 3 to 7 above;
14. Invites the Secretary-General to continue hia role as set out in
paragraph 4 af resolution 731 (1992);
15. Calls aaain uvon al1 Hember States individually and collectively to
encourage the Libyan Goverment to respond fully and effectively to the requests
and decisions in resolutions 731 (1992)and 748 (1392);
16. Expresses its readiness to revkew the measures set forth above and in
reçolution 748 (1992) with a view ta suspendingth- immediately if the
secretary-Generalreports to the ~ouncil that the Libyan Goverment ha8 ensured
the appearance of those charged with the bombing of Pan Am 153 for trial before
the appropriate United Kingdom or United States court and has satisfied the
French judicial authorities with respect to the bombing of UTA 772# and with a
view to lifting them imediately when Libya compliesfully with the requests and
decisionsin resalutions 731 (1992) and 748 (1992); and semests the
secretary-General, within 90 days of such ~uspensi~n,to report to the Council
on Libya's cornpliance with the femaining provisions of its resolutions
731 (1992) and 748 41992) and, in the case of non-cornpliance, expresses its
resolve to teminate immediately the suspension of these measurea;
If. Deckdes to remain seized of the matter. S/RES/Bi33 (1993)
Page 5 I
Annex
The following are the items referred to Ln paragraph 5 of this resolution:
X. Pumpa of medium or large capacitywhose capaeity ie equal to or larger
than 350 eubic metres per hour and drivers (gas turbines and electrie
motore) designed for use in the transportation of crude ail and natural
gae
II. Equipment designed for use in crude oil export terminale:
- Loading buoys or single point moorings (spm)
- Flexible hoses for conneetion between underwater manifolds (plem) and
single paint moaring and floating loading hosee of large sizea (from
12" to 16")
III. Equipgnent not specially designed for use in crude oil export temiinals but
which because of their large capacity can be used for this purpose:
- Loading pumps of large capacity (4,900 m3/h) and small head (10 bars)
- Boosting pumps within the same range of flow rates
- Inline pipe Line inspection tools and cleaning devices 4i.e. pigging
toois) (16" and above)
- Hetering equbprnent of large capacity (1,000 m3Jh and above)
IV. Refinery equipent:
- Boilers meeting American Soebety of Hechanica.1 Engineers 1 standards
- Furnaces meeting American Society of Mechanical Engineers 8 standards
- Fraetionation eolumns meeting American Society of Mechanical Engineers
8 tand darda
- Punipa meeting meriean Petroleum Institute 610 standards
- Catalytic reactors meeting American Society of Mechanical Engineers 8
standards
- Prepared catalysts, including the following:
Catalysts containing platïnum
Catalysts containing molybdenum
V. Spare parts destined for the items in 1 to IV above. Exhibit 33
ProvisionalVerbatim Record of the Three Thousand Three Hundred
and Twelfth Meeting of the Seçurity Council
{UnitedNations Document S/~~.3312; Il November 1993)UNITED
NATIONS
.---
Security Council
S/PV.3312
11 November 1993
PROVfSIONRL VERBATfM RECORDOF THE THREE THOUSAND
THREE HUNDRED AND TWELFTHMEETING
Held at Headquartere, New York,
on Thursday, 11 November 1993, at 11.30 a.m.
President: Hr. JESUS (cape Verde)
Hembers: Brazil SARDENBERG
China LI Zhaoxing
Djibouti OLHAY E
France WERIMEE
Hungary eRDos
Japan mAELA
noroceo
SNOUSSI
New Zealand KEATING
Pakiçtan MARKER
Russian Federaiion VORONTÇOV
Spain YMEZ BARNUEVO
United Kingdom of Great Britain
and Northern Ireland sir David HANNAY
United States of America ws. ALBRfGHT
Venezuela W. TAYLHRRDAT
This record contains the original text of apeeches delivered in EngLish and
interpretations of speeches in the other languages. The final text wilL be
printed in the Official Records of the Seruritv Council.
Corrections should be submitted to original speeches onby. They ehould be
sent under the signature of a member of the delegatian caneerned, within one
week, to the Chief, Officia1 Records Editing Secfion, Office of Conference
Services, room PC2-794, 2 United Nations Plaza, and incorpurated in a eopy of
the record. The rneetins was called to order at 12.10 p.m.
ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA
The asenda was adapted.
LETTERS DATED 20 AND 23 DECEMBER1991, FROM FRANCE, THE UNITED
KINGDOM OF GREAT BRITAPN AND HORTHERN IRELAND AND THE UNITED STATES
OF AMERICA (SJ23306, S/23307, S/23308, S/23309 and S/23317)
The PRESIDENT: As agreed in the Councilas prior
consultations, 1 should like to state, in connectionwitb the
agenda just adopted, that the cursent formulationovertakes the
earlier two formulations under which this item has been discussed,
namely, items 168 and 173 of the list of matters of which the
Security council is çeized; that list is contained in document
S/25070. Çince those items have been subsumed under the present
item, they ni11 accordingly be deleted £rom the list of matters
contained in document S/25070.
I should like to inform the Council that 1 have' received
letters from the representativesof Egypt, the Libyan Arab
Jamahiriya and Sudan, in which they request to be invited to
participate in the discussion of the item on the Councills agenda.
In conformity with the u~ual practice, I propose, with the consent
of the Council, to invite those representativesto participate in
the discussion without the rlght to Vote, in accordance with the
relevant provisions of the-Charter and rule 37 of the Councilas
provisional rules of procedure,
There being na objection, it is so decided. At the invitation of the ~resident, Mr. ~lhouderi ILibyan Arab
Jamahiriya) took a lace at the Council table; Mr. Elarabv IEsv~tl
and Mr. Yasin (Sudan) took the places reserved for them at the side
of the Council Chamber.
The PRESIDENT: The Security Council will now resume its
consideration of the item on its agenda.
The Security Council is meeting in accordance with the
understanding reached in its prios consultations.
Members of the Council have before them document S/2670%,
which contains the text of a draft resolution submitted by France.
the United Kingdom of Great k ri tainand Northern Ireland and the
United States of America.
1.should like to draw the attention of the members of the
council to the following other documents: S/S6304, lettes dated
13 August 1993 from the representativesof France,'theUnited
Kingdom of Great Elritain and Uorthern Ireland and the United States
of America to the United Nations addressed to the Secretary-
Generak; S/26500, SJ26523, S/26604 and S/26629, letters dated
22 September and 1, 18 and 22 October 1993, respectively, from the
Permanent Representative of the Libyan Arab ~amahiriya to the
United Nations addressed to the Secretary-General.
The first speaker is the representative of the Libyan Arab
Jamahiriya, on whom 1 now call.
Mr. ELHOUDERI (Libyan Arab ~amahiriya) (interpretation
from Arabic): 1 congratulate you on your assumption of the
psesidency of the Security Council this month and commend the
efforts made by your predecessor. 1 do hope that the ~ecurity
~ouncil will be able to really and truly discharge its functions in
line with the purposes and principles of the United ~ations (Mr. Elhouderi, Libvan Arab
Jarnahiriva)
Charter, and to conduct itself in a manner that is compatible with
the law and the public interest of the internationalcemmunity. 1
do hope that bias and special interests will not be gkven the upper
hand and that the Council will steer clear of selectivity and
double standard.
The Security Council meets today not to consider a matter that
threatens international pence and security but to consider a draft
resolution that seeks the intensificationof the sanctions which
have been imposed on the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya by the Councills
resokution 748 (1992). Prior to this meeting, the Council had
automatically renewed those sanctions four times over a perid of
15 months. Ço, why intensifythe sanctions now? The pretext which
the three countries have repeated ad infinitumis the allegation
that the Libyan Arab Jamahiriyahas not complied with Security
Council resolution 731 (1992). However, the truth of the matter is
that the Libyan Arab Jdmahiriyahas fully responded to Security
Council resolution 731 (1992). The only point that remains
outstanding is the problem that arose from the demand by the United
States of America and the United Kingdom that the two allegeû
suspects be extradited, This is a problem that remains unsolved
because of a legal wrangle over which country has the cornpetence in
law to try the two perçons accused of involvement in the bombing of
Pan Am flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland.
Essentially, this is a question that is definitively settled
by the provisions of the Montreal 1971 Convention for the
Suppression of Unlawful Acts against the Safety of Civil Aviation,
The Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, the United States and the United
Kingdom are al1 parties to that Convention, which, from the start,
stipulates jusisdiction regarding the trial of the accused to the
Libyan Arab Jamahiriya. That was
the view of the Libyan Arab (Mr. ~lhouderi. Libvan Arab
Jarnahiriva)
Jamahiriya from the very beginning. Accordingly, it acted within
that cornpetence as soon as it received the indictmentsissued by
the three countries, which have been circulated as official
documents of the General Assembly and the Security Council. Libya
announced at the time that it would deal with the indictments
constructively and, farthwith, referred them to the Libyan judicial
authorities. A judge was appointed to investigate the matter and
he started his preliminary investigationby placing the two accused
under preventive custody. The United States and the United Kingdom
were accordingly notified and were requested to cooperate with the
Libyan judicial authorities either by allowing the Libyan judge
access tu the records of their investigations or by fixing a date
for carrying out the necessary investigation. In mder to create
an atmosphere of trust, to ensure that the proper procedures be
followed during the investigationand the trial and to underscore
fairness and neutrality, Libya proposed to Mr. Vasiliy Safronchuck,
the persona1 envay of the Secretary-General, during his visit to
Tripoli on 26 January 1992, that the two countriessend their own
judges, or that the Secretary-General cal1 on judges from certain
countries, as well as representatives from the League of Arab
States, the Organization of African Unity and the Organization of
the Islanic Conference, to observe the trial. Howeves, the
American and British authorities refused to cooperate with the
Libyan authorities.
The intransigence of the two countries, their refusa1 to apply
the provisions of the 1971 Montreal Convention and their insistence
on the extradition of the two persons to either one of them
hampered the proper procedure of the trial of the two accuçed. The
two countries also refused to submit the case to arbitration, as
the Convention stipulates for disputes arising over the (Mr . Elhouderi. Lib~an Arab
Jarnahiriva)
interpretation or application of its provisions. As a result, the
Libyan Arab ~amahiriya took the question of the application of the
Convention's rules to the International Court of Justice, The
matter is still pending before the Court.
~otwithstanding my country's repair to the ~nternationalCourt
of ~ustice and the natural need to await its verdict, we have
spared no effort in seriously seeking a solution that would be in
consonance with the provisions of the law. My country had proposed
ta request the International Court of Justice to ascertain the
.validity of the accusations levelled at the two Libyan national5
and sugqeçted that they be surrendered to the office of the United
~ations Developrnent Programme (UNDP) in Tripoli for investigation.
Libya also pr&eosed that the Secretary-General forma legal
\
cornmittee composed of fair and neutral judges to investigate the
facts of the case,'make sure that the alleqations against the
accused were sericiu&.,ones and conduct a comprehensive
investigation. {Mr. Elhouderi, Libyan Arab
Jarnahisiva)
Libya decfared that if the Secretary-General concluded that
the accusations were justified, the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya would
not object to the extradition of the two accused, under the
persona1 supervision of the Secretary-General,to a third party, on
condition that they may not be re-extradited to any other party.
Al1 these proposais fell on deaf ears and were met by insistence on
extraditing the two accused - without any legitimate justification,
be it in law or in treaty provision - to either the United States
of America or Scotland.
We did not extradite the two accused because that is against
our laws. The laws of most countries,if not al1 countries,
prohibit such extradition unless there 1s a treaty or convention
regulating such matters between the countries concerned. There are
no bilateral treaties between the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya and either
the United States or the United Kingdom. There is, howeves, a
multilateralconvention that clearly and accurately regulates
actions related to attacks against international civil aviation,
namely the 1971 Montreal Convention. Al1 of us are parties to that
convention. Regrettably, the United States and the United Kingdom
declined to comply witb the provisions of the said convention and.
insisted, merely on the basis of theis own personal wishes, on the
extradition of the two accused to either one of the two countries.
We wish to draw attention here to the gravity of involvkng the
Security Council in this game whereby States are forced to
surrender their own citizenç to other States.
The pretext used by the two countries to circumvent the 1971
Montreal Convention is that they have no faith in Libya'ç abllity
to try its own citizens. This claim gives the impression that only
their judicial systems are trustworthy, despite events and evidence
which suggest the contrary. Suffice it to recall areas of (Mr. Elhouderi, Libvan Arab
Jamahiriya)
defiçiency in the American judicial system which were revealed by
,
the Radney King trial in Los Angeles. Furthemore, a report issued ,
by the Gallup Institute and published by a European newspaper
reveals that 61 per cent of Britons do not think they could get a
fair trial in Britain. A recent trial in Old Bailey, in Britain,
also disclosed another aspect of the British judicial system when a
judge suspended the trial of three detectives because of the amount
and intensity of publicity surrounàingthe case, and because the
media had portrayed the defendants as the perpetrators of the
crimes for which they were being tried. This psompted the British
newspaper The ~uardianto ask on 12 October 1993, in an editorial
entitled "Fair sia al,'Fair Senseu,
"Why do the Lkbyan suspects in the Lockerbie incident fear
trial in Scotland, although British ministers and officiais
confirm that they would receive a fair trial?"
The paper called on the miniçters to look into the ruling of the
Old Bailey judge and çaid that the tuo conditions related to the
Old Bailey case apply to the two Libyans. Indeed the Libyans
receive even more publicity than the Old Bailey defendants whenever
the politicians and journalists rehash the Pan Am incident over
Lockerbie. The paper went on to Say that the Libyans have indeed
compelling reasons to cornplain.
Moreover, the informationgathered by the two countries should
not be accepted at face value as irrefutable facts. The United
States had previously claimed, on the strength of its own
information gathering, that the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya was
responsible for the Berlin nightclub incident. On the strength of
that information, the United States sent its state-of-the-art
planes, at ~ight and carrying the most advanced weapons of
destruction, to bomb the cities of Tripoli and Benghazi and the
i (Ms. Elhouderi. Libvan Arab
Jamahir iya)
home of the Leader, killing dozens of innocent people. A trial
later proved that the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya had nothing to do with
the incident and campletely exonerated it. You may also recall
that the General Assembly of the United Nations condemned that
aggression in its sesolution 41/38 (1986) , which acknowledged the
right of the families of the victirns'to receive compensation,
something which the United States has thus fas refused to do. This
was an instance of blatant aggression in which military force was
used and which jeopardized international peace and security. AS
such, the Security C.ouncil should have considered it. The council
failed tc do so because the three States, sponsors of the draft
resolution before you today, resorted to the power of veto.
Another exarnple of the fallibility of the informationgathered
by the agencies of thoçe countries can be found in United Nations
Genexal Assembly document (A/48/477) concerning the United States
insistence on inspecting the Chinese ship "Yin Hemu in order t0 look
for two chemicals used in the manufacture of chernical weapons. The
doc~m~nt states that
"The 'Yin He1 incident is the sole making of the United States
side as a result of its erroneous act based on its false
intelligence.lU (~~481477, annex 1, Dasa. 2)
China's insistence that the ship did not carry the two chemicals
was to no avail. The United States insisted on inspecting the ship
and China insisted that thaé shsuld be done only in a neutral
country. A çareful inspectionof al1 containers on the ship proved
categorically that the two chernicals were n0t in the shipts cargo.
1s it strange then, in light of the obvious legai nature of this
issue, that the Libyan &rab ~amahiriyarefuses to surrender the two
suspects? And in view of the clear evidence and the definitive IJarnahiriva)
facts, is it strange for Libya to cal1 for the trial to be held in
a neutral country?
Despite all of this, Libya submitted the question to the
People's Basic Congresses (whkchhas the power to take decisions)
in their second session for 1992, Following detailed discussions,
the People's Congresses adopted'the followingdecision in relation
to the extradition of the two suspects:
"The Basic People's Congresses affirm their adherence to the
Libyan Criminal Code and the Libyan code of Criminal
Procedure. They raise no objection to the conduct of the
investigation and the trial through the seven-member Committee
established by the League of Arab States or through the United
Nations before a just and impartial court to be agreed upon."
On this basis, my country declared its readiness tu enter into
negetiations, under the supervisionof the Secretasy-General of the
United Nations,with the countries concerned, with a view to
holding the trial in a neutral country wbich could be agreed upon
by the parties to the dispute and which could provide al1 the
necessasy guarantees. The Secretary-General of the United Nations
was notified of this step on 8 December 1992, but, like previous
attempts, this one was rejeckd by the parties concerned. In itç
letter to the Secretary-General of the United ~ations on
28 July 1993, my country confirmed that it was willing to discuss
the procedures and arrangements relatlng to the trial of the two
accused, with the mission the Çecretary-General was about to send
to Libya. It thus becomes clear that out of our desire to reach a
reasonahle salution and despite the fact that the 1931 Montreal
~onvention gives Libya the right'to try the two.suspects before
Libyan courts - a question that is stiLl pending before the
~nternational Court of Justice - the Libyan position has been (Mr. Elhoudesi, Libyan Arab
Jarnahiriva)
extremely flexible. On the other side, there is the rigid and
intransigent position based on nothing more than the logic of
force. (Mr. Elhouderi. Libyan Arab
Jamahiriya)
The extradition of the two accused was one of the demands made
by the three countries. It was demanded aPso that Libya should
take full responsibility for the acts of the two Libyan officiais,
submit all information it has on the crime and pny appropriate
compensation. Do these demands conform to the principles included
in various human-rights instruments? Could these two countries
treat their own çitizens in the same manner they want Libya tb
treat the Libyans? What logic and what legal system would cal1 on
a defendant to submit self-incriminating evidence, bear the
responsibility for an allegation made against him and pay
compensation, al1 before any investigationor trial had been
undertaken? Then we are told that the sanctions will not be lifted
unless the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya fully and effectively complies
with these demands. ~his begs the question: who would decide that
such effective and full corapliance has taken place? ,Theanswer:
no one other than the two countries themselves. There is no logic
or legal process. It is clear that force, and force alone, is the
logic and the process.
Added to this are the Draconian demands aimed at portraying
Libya as a country that does not çomply with Security council
resolutions and that violates international laws. Consequently,
sanctions may be imposed and tightened against Libya,
Notwithstanding the strange character of these demands, my country
has shown extreme flexibility and has declared its readiness to pay
proper compensation if it is proven responsible for this incident.
In its search £or a satisfactoxy solution, the Libyan Arab
Jamahiriya dia not stop at invoking the law and calling for
recourse to judicial authorities. It unilaterally resorted to the
International Court of Justice, which is the principal judicial
organ of the United Nations. It also talked to the (Mr . ~lhouderi, Libvan Arab
Jarnahiriva)
Secretary-Eeneral of the United ~ations, confiming to him its full
readiness ta cooperate with him and açking that he play a bigger
role in helping al1 the parties to find a reasonable and
satisfactory solution.
Libya also contacted other countries and other organizations
to whkch it belongs. Al1 of them expressed their deep concern at
the escalation of the crisis between Libya and the ~nited States of
America, the United Kingdom and France, as well as at the threat of
the imposition of additional sanctions and the use of force in
relations between countries. They called for a peaceful settlement
.of the crisis and appealed to the Security cquncii .toreview
resolutian 748 (1992) and, in recognitionof Libyams initiatives
aimed at çettling the crisis, to lift the embargo imposed on Libya.
In this respect, 1 ahould like to recall the resolution
adcpted by the Council of ~inistersof the organization of African
Unity (OAU) at its fifty-eighthordinary session, which was held in
Cairo. That resolution expresses appreciation for the efforts and
initiatives taken by Libya in order te settle the crisis
peacefully. The third operative paragraph of the resolution reads:
tmExpreçses its grave concern at the eçealation of the
crisis and the threats of additional sanctions and the use
of force as a pattern of relations among states, in
violation of the Charters of the Organizationof African
Unity and the United ~ations as well as international laws
and normsu. (A/48/322, annex 1. W. 47)
In paragraph 5 of the same resolution, the OAU Counçil of Ministers
urges the Security council to reconsider its resolution and lift
the embargo imposed on ~ibya, in recognition of the positive
initiatives Libya has taken in handling the crisis. (Mr. ~lhouderi, Libvan Arab
Jarnahiriva)
Within the context of our efforts to address this problem, my
country submitted to the Secretary-General,on 11 Çeptember 1993,
a memerandum that contained points relating to its legal position
vis-à-vis resolutions 731 (1992) and 748 (1992). In that
memorandum, Libya asked questions baçed on the assumptionthat the
two accused would challenge the-charges levelled at them and
voluntarily agree to stand trial before a foreign court. The
memorandurn also asked for clarifications and safeguards relating ta
the foreign country concerned. On 24 September 1993, my country
received the Çecretary-General's answers to the questions
concerning the two accused.
Although we have not received all the answers, the
Secretary-Generalwas notified on 29 September 1993 that we had
given the two suspects the answers to the questions about them. We
confirmed to him that the safeguards he offered were sufficient and
acceptable, and that the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, following the
receipt of those guarantees, would not object to the appearance of
the two suspects before the Scottish judiciaryand would even urge
thea to appeat. We expressed to the Secretary-Generalour belief
that only one çtep remained in osdes to resolve this crisis that
has gone on for several years: the acceptance by the two suspects,
their families and their attorneys of the necessity of appearing
before the court. In those two letters, contained in document
S/26523, we emphasized that we would deal with the French demands
with the same determination with which we had been dealing with the
American and British demands.
As the Csuncil knews, the defence team, which includes legal
counsellors of reveral different nationalities, including British
and American attorneys, held several meetings in Tripoli an 8 and
9 Octobes 1993. The two accused themselves attended some of those (Mr. Elhouderi. Libvan Arab
Jamahiriya)
meetings and confirrned their intention to appear before a fair
court based en valid legal procedures and a comprehensive
investigation,n~twithstanding their right, under national and
international law, to remain in Libya. The counsellors discussed
the inalienable sights of any defendant: the right to a fair trial
before an unbiased court, the right to be presurned innocent and the
right to have sufficient time to prepare a defense after being
notified of the charges and the evidence the prosecution intends to
present in support of those charges. These are rights included in
the legislation of al1 countries and contained in the ~nternational
Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Al1 of us are parties to
this Covenant, which entered into force on 23 March 1976.
The defence attorneys were deeply concerned over the possible
prejudicial effect the publicity in the United States and Scotland
would have on the prospective jurors and about the absence of the
usuai arrangements for extradition because of the prosecution's
refusa1 to reveal the evidence it intends to use in the trial. The
defence attorneys believe that this refusa1 greaély limits their
ability to defend the case properly.
On the basis
of a request made by the defence counsel, my
country c~ntacted ~nitzerland for permission to hold the trial
there, and contacts between Libya and Switzerland are continuing to
that end.
The negative impact of media publicity surrounding the case is
not limited to prospective jurors but has also been extended to
defence attorneys. We have witnessed a ferocious attack against an
American lawyer when it was thought that he might participate in
giving council to the two accused. Obstacles were also put in the
way of another American lawyer who participated in the Tripoli (Jarnaiya)eri,LibvArab
meeting othedefenscounsellors. It thus beclearthat the
concerns the defencattorneys sationaand justified. 1
1
I
I
I
I
1
I
1
I
I
I
1
I
I (Mr. Elhouderi, ~ibyan Arab
Jamahiriva)
The Secsetary-General of the United Nations and members of the
Security Council have been informed of the results of these
meetings.
In addition, the Secretary of the General People" Cornmittee
for Foreign Liaison and InternationalCooperation - the Foreign
Minister of Libya - during his stay in New York, conducted wide
consultations involving most melabers of the Security Csuncil and
the Secretary-General of the United Nations. Our Foreign Minister
explained the developments of the crisis and eonfirmed our
determination to implement Security Council resolution 731 (1992).
Al1 of this demonstrates that serious efforts are being made
in relation to the trial of the two accused. It also proves that
we are net procsastinating or narking tirne, as the two countries
claim. Marking time is not in our interests, as it is our people
who are suifering the adverse effects of the sanctions, We are
interested in seeing this trial held as soon as possible. No one
should forget that we received answers to some of our questions on
24 September 1993 and that the defence lawyers for the suspects met
on 8 and 9 October 1993.
As for the French demands, the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya did not
se@ in them anything that runs counter to the law. Intensive
contacts and talks between the judicial authorities of both the
Libyan Arab ~amahiriya and France were held with a view to reaching
a determination of responsibility for the explosion of the aircraft
on UTA flight 772. The Libyan and French lnvestigative judges met
several times, and the French judge saw the minutes of the
investigation undertaken by the ~ibyan judge. It was agreed that
the French judge would corne to ~ibya to continue his investigation.
Contacts between the tno countries are already under way with a
view tc enabling the French judge to complete this endeavour. 1 (Mr. Elhouderi, Libvan Arab
Jarnahiriya)
believe that had the French judge not chosen a militasy destroyer
as a means of transport to Libya our response to the French demands
would have led to encouraging results.
Only three months and a few days after the adoption of
Security Council resolution 731 (1992), the three countries managed
to get the Security council to adopt its resolution 748 (1992), in
which the question of terrorisrn was widely and artificially
included. It cantained an exceptional accusation, on which was
based an unprecedented air and diplornatic embargo. Al1 of this was
done with unprecedented speed and deciçiveness, and in violation of
many provisions of the ~nited Nations Charter.
It is obvious that the three countries succeeded in making the
council cornpress the whole phenornenon of international terrorism
into the Lockerbie and UTA incidents. The Libyan Arab Jamahiriya
has been linked intentionally with the phenornenon of international
terrorism so that the three countries may be able to achieve their
goals. If it is claimed that the Security Council wants to devote
special attention to civil-aviation incidents, the Council should
also have looked into the incidents involving the Korean, Iranian,
Libyan and Cuban civil aircraft, ta avoid appearing seleçtive in
its work or being accuçed of applying double standards,
However, let us look at the position of the Libyan Arab
Jamahiriya on this matter. My country, which has endured terrorism
in the recent past and still çuffers today, deçlared, in a letter
to the Secretary-GeneraL of the United Nations on 11 May 1992
(S/23918), itç unequivocal condernnation of internationalterrorism
in al1 its forms, regardless of its source. Libya confirmed that
thsre are no terrorist training camps, terrorist organizations or.
terrorist groups on its soil. We called for the dispatch of a
cornmittee of the Security Council;the United Nations Secretariat (Mr. Elhouderi. Libvan Arab
Jarnahiriva)
or any other competent United Nations body, to verify this at any
time. My country also declared that it will never permit the
direct er indirect use of its territory, citizens or institutions
in the perpetration of any terrorist acts and that it is ready to
punish severely those who are proved to have been involved in such
acts.
The Libyan Ministry of Foreign Affairs issued a statement
confirming the contents of this letter, and the statement waç
circulated as an off içial Security Council document (S123917) , My
country reaffirmed its position in its lettes dated 8 December 1992
(S/24961) to the Secretary-General. In a letter dated 28 July 1993
to the Çecretary-General, Libya stated its readinesç to receive a
mission of the Secretary-General'schoice to verify the
non-existenceof alleged terrorist training camps on its soil. In
addition, my country actively cooperated with ri tain in respect of
that country's special requests.
However, none of thiç has been sufficient for the three
countries, which have refused to send a mission to verify the
non-existence of camps and other facilities. Thus they hope to
keep the terrorism charge hanging over Libya like the sword of
Darnocles and to justify the continuationand intensification of the
sanctions. They base their case on the pretext that Libya has not
complied with Security council resolutions, and they rely on an
enigmatic phrase ta the effect that Libya knows what is required of
it.
What more can Libya do? What should Libya do to persuade the
three countries to stop levelling such allegations and accusations?
Will the three countries respond to Libya's request for a mission
to verify that there is no basis for such allegations? (Mr, Elhouderi, Libvan Arab
Jarnahiriva)
The sanctions, which have been imposed because of a legal
dispute, into which the question of terrorismwaç deftly inserted
have severely hurt our people in al1 aspects of their lives and
have nad a neqative impact on our development plans. We have
submitted to the Çeçurity Council 24 documents detailing the harm
caused to various çectors. 1 shall not repeat the contents of
those documents, but I should like to refer specifieallyto the
adverse effects of the prohibition on the export to Libya of spare
1 parts, engineering services and maintenancerequired for Libyan .
1
aircraft and their components. These adverse effects impact on a
vital sector that is indispensable tu a vast country that depends
~
largely on air transport.
The United States of America and the United Kingdom are not
1 satisfied with the sanctions contained in resolutioh '48 (1992).
They have been trying,under the auspices of the Cornittee
establishedby that resolution, to widen the scope of the
sanctions, using transparent pretexts and rigid positions. This
includes the çuccess of the two countries in widening the çcope of
the sanctionsthrough the Cornittee's rejection of cooperation
between the International Atomis Anergy Agency and Libya for the
establishment of a laboratory at the Centre for Agricultural
Research in Tripoli to analyze the effects of agricultural
insecticides on the health of human beings, animals and plants. It
includes also the cornmittee" rrefsal, without explanation,of the
humanitarian request concerning the transport of ~ibyan cltizens to
locations abroad - using Libyan aircraft - for medical treatnient.
These patients included cases of coma, quadruple paralyçis, brain
concussion resulting from traffic accidents and sudden health
deteriorationneceçsitating advanced medical treatment, One of
them was a Young girl of six, named Safaa Ali AMel Rasoul, Who (Mr. ~lhouderi, Libvan Arab
Jamahiriya)
died at Tripoli Central Hospital as a result of complications
arising £rom her illness.
In view of the Committeets abuse of its mandate, the competent
authorities had to move other emergency cases, using various modes
of conveyance, including land, sea and air transport. This
resulted in patientsf having to endure long, hard journeys, as is
outlined in the memarandum sent to the Cornittee by the Libyan
mission on 18 August 1993.
One of the Councilts main reasons for the establishment of
this Cornittee was to facilitate considerationof the sequests
submitted by 'countries for approval of flights for essential
humanitarian purposes. The repeated refusal of requests for
permissionto move seriously il1 persons - arbitrary refusals, with
no reasons given to justify them - nullifiesthe resolution'sonly
humanitarian gesture. Furthemore, these repeated refusals
continue to severely harm innocent people. ~his can be neither the
intention nor the objective of the United Nations. The three
countries have not limited themselves to expanding the scope of the
sanctions, but have extended this behaviour to include the
Cornittee's methods of work, putting it on a consensus basis thnt
runs çounter te the provisions of the Charter and the Security
Çouncil's provisionaï rules of procedure. (Mx. Elhouderi. Libvan
Arab Jarnahiriva)
selection of the harshest sanctions, which are not
cornensurate wkth a legal dispute, attempts by the three countries
to expand them, and to exert continuous pressure on the Security
Council to impose yet more sanctions, prompt us to wonder about the
real reasons behind this ferociaus campaign aqainst the Libyan Arab
Jamahiriya. The three Governments, while cloçing every door that
could lead to a solution to the crisiç either in regard to the
trial of the two accused or to the verificationof the allegationç
that the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya supports international terrorisrn,
declared, in their tripartite statement of 12 Auguçt 1993, that
they had no "hidden agendam. The United States of America and the
United Kingdom intentionally refused to answer Libyams specific
questions related to internationalterrorism and the lifting of the
sanctions. Even when one of the two countries hinted at the
possibility of suspending or lifting the sanctions,the answers
have been vague and conducive to suspicion rather than to
confidence. The bottom line is that the whole issue remains the
preserve of the two countries.
The draft resolution now before the Council, document S/26T01,
sepeats the very same grave legal mistake of both resolutions
731 (1992) and 748 (1992) 'in that it links Libya to international
terrorism on no other basis but the suspicions that have been
created segarding two ~ibyan nationals on the basis of reports by
intelligence agencies. This constituteç an a priori judgement that
has not been substantiated by any evidence up to this point. They
want the draft resolution to be adopted under Chapter VI1 of the
Charter on a natter which should have been dealt with by the
Council under Chapter VI, due to the fact that the issue in
question is a legal dispute over whish country has cornpetence to sj~v. 3312
23
I
(Mr. Elhouderi. Libvan
I Arab Jarnahiriva)
try the two accused, a dispute which is essentially settled by the
I provisions of the 1971 Montreal Convention.
This draft resolution has no justification whatsoever,
I especially since we are approaching the final phase in the
settlement of the dispute. Moreover, it contains more
I unprecedented sanctions. It iç an attempt to destroy the Libyan
economy by adversely impacting on our people's only source of
1 income, as well as on the civil aviation structure on which my
country depends for transportation. The paragraphs of the draft
I resolution include provisions which prove beyond doubt that its
sponsors do have a hidden agenda* Otherwise, what is the meaning
I of operative paragraph 4, which calls for depositing the financial
revenues from the sale of oil and agricultural produce in separate
1 bank accountsl And what is the meaning of operative paragraph 16
which refers to the suspension of sanctionsand their reimposition
I within 90 days?
The sponsors of the draft resolution insist on ignoring the
1 decisiens of regional and other organizationson the matter and
turn a deaf ear to their points of view by stating in operative
I paragraph 15 that al1 Member States should encourage Libya to
1 respond fully and effectively to these requests. The States we
refer to have already expressed their views in the resolutions
1 adopted by the Arab Maghreb Union, the League of Arab States, the
Organization of African Unity, the Qrganization of the Islamic
I Conference, and the Non-Alignedgroup. None the less, there is an
insistence on ignoring al1 these decisions and resolutions. We
1 would kike to know the relationship between the maintenance of
international peace and security and the contents of operative
I paragraphs 8, 11 and 12. ~oes this not constitute an inter£erence
in the minute interna1 affairs of States and does It not, Arab EJarnahiriva)ibyan
therefore, constitute an obstruction of justice in those States in
addition to being an imposition of a strange kind of tutelage over
them, al1 because of a dispute over the venue where two accused
perçons should stand trial? In operative paragraph 16 what then is
the meaning of the phrase:
the Libyan Government has ensured the appearance .f those
çharged with the bombing of Pan Am 103 for trial before the
appropriate United Kingdom or United States court ...i7
Once again we should like to draw attention to the dangers of
involvingthe-Security Council in the question of extradition,.
which is a sensitive and complicated legal issue that requires the
conclusion of bilateral or multilateral agreements following
negotiations between the States concesned. To involve the Council
in questions such as these would set a dangerous precedent. The
harm caused by this draft will not be limited to the Libyan people
alone, but will extend tu neighbouring and European countries whose
interestç are linked to ours. It will have adverse effects on the
overall process of foreign investment. These harmful effects will
undermine the security and stability of our region, whiçh, at this
time, is in dire need of security and stability.
The draft resolution constitutes a blatant violation of the
provisions of the United Nations Charter and the norms of
internationallaw. Should it be adopted as it stands and in this
manner, it will represent a danqerous turning point in the work of
the Council, and constitute clear proof that the Council does not
work on behalf of al1 the Mernbers of the United Nations, but in
accordance with the wishes of one or two countries.
The continuance and intensificationof sanctions will not
solve the problern. It will even complicate it. What we have here
is a dispute that could have been easily resolved had the three (Mr, Elhouderi. ~ibran
Arab Jarnahiriva)
countxies complied with the provisions of the 1971 Montreal
Convention. Now we have two positions: the position of the Libyan
Arab Jarnahiriya, which is supported by law and the provisions of
international conventions, and the position of the three countries,
which is based only on theix claimç and allegations. mile the
position of the former is characterizedby great flexibility,the
position of the latter is rigid and intransigent, based only on
allegations and undisclosed reasons linking Libya to the
international terrorism phenomenon which has been under
consideration by the United Nations for many, many years. As a
result, the'çecurity Council haç been hastily pushed into action
under Chapter VI1 instead of Chapter VI of the Charter, imposing
harsh sanctions which are not cornensurate with the dispute at
hand.
We do not want to underestimate the seriousness of the two
incidents which caused the loss of innocent lives,because ne too
have been burned by the fire of international terrorism, but we
want tu put things in the right context and perspective, using an
objective approach and avoiding the use of exaggerationand excess
as others do, We do not want to cover up anything related ta the
two accused or to procrastinate in order to waste time. We never
disagreed as to the principle of the trial. The disagreement has
baen, and still is, on the venue cf the trial. The tvo suspects
and their attorneys do not disagree as to the principle of the
trial, but want a place where neutrality and fairness can be
guaranteed and where the proper procedures and arrangements for
such a trial can be made. The Libyan Arab Jamahiriya will continue
its sincere efforts to fine a solution to this problem within the
framewosk of respect for the principles of international law and
the provisions of the relevant international instruments. (Mr. Elhouderi, Libyan
Arab Jarnahiriva)
Furthermore, Libya considers that its efforts will achieve
this end if the three countrieç abandon their policies of pressure
and threats and respond to the language of dialogue and
understanding which my country advocates and pursues. If the
Security Counçil plays a positive role in a collective spirit,
liftç the sanctions that only compliçate this matter further, and
assistç the parties concerned to fullow the right, geaceful path,
it will have made an important contribution towards the achievement
of that goal.
My country will continue to do its utmost to cooperate with
the Secretary-General of the United Nations in osder to reach a
final solution of this problem. The PRESIDENT: 1 thank the representative of the Libyan
Arab Jamahiriya for his kind words addressed tu me.
The next speaker Ys the repreçentative of Egypt. T invite him
to take a place at the Council table and to make his statement.
Mr. ELARABY [Egypt) (interpretation from Arabic): Allow
me at the outset to extend to you, sir, my congratulations on
presiding over the Security Council for this month. I am confident
that your great diplornatic skills and personal qualitieç, which are
well known to all, will benefit the Council's work. 1 should also
like to extend to your predecessor, Ambasçador Sardenberg, our
thanks for the ski11 with which he steered the Councilvç work last
month.
Egypt has followed with great interest and concern the
developments relating to the two criminal acts that resulted in the
loss of hundreds of lives, namely Pan Am flight 103 over ~ockerbie,
and the bombing of UTA 772. There can be no doubt that
safeguarding the safety and secusity of civil aviation are
pserequisites of today's world. Egypt supports fully all
international efforts designed to eradicate the destructive
phenomenon of terrorism cornpletely, Egypt has expressed its deep
concern over the incidents and condoled with the families of the
victims of those two incidents.
According to the provisions of internationallaw, al1 who
perpetrate sueh crimes must be identified and brought to justice.
When the crime is proved, the penalty must follow, again according
to the provisions and principles.of international law. Equal
riqhts and duties under the Law and equal application of
international law form the basis for the criteria upon which the
contemporary international legal system rests.
The international community has condemned al1 acts of
terrorism in al1 its forms on more than one occasion. The (Mr. Elarabv. EsyEt)
principal objective of the Councilqs adoption of sesolutions
731 (1992) and 748 (1992) was to attempt to obtain the facts
underlying those two incidents and to determine where the
responsibility lies with regard to the terroriçtic acts against Pan
American flight 103 and UTA flight 772.
My delegation, therefore, regrets that the truth and the facts
with regard to those two acts have not yet been clarified and that
no progress has been made in arriving at the truth clearly and
unambiguouçly, despite the resolutions adopted by the Security
Council and the unremitting efforts made by the United Nations
Secretary-General, which my Governmsntgreatly appreciates, and in
spite of the intensivebilateral contactsEgypt has made to find a
suitable formula that would allow for impkementation of the two
resolutions .
Egypt has scrupulouslyabided by the resolutions adopted by
the Security Council because we are fully convinced af the need to
respect al1 reçolutions adopted by the Council in line with the
Chartes. We cal1 upon al1 the members of the international
community to abide by that fundamental principle without exception
and without resort to double standards when canfronting the various
issues with which the Security Council addresses.
Egypt, in the active role it has continued to play in
attempting to contain the criçis arising from the Lockerbie
incident and prevent the escalation of tension has never lost sight
of any of the vital elements that .might lead to a breakthrough in
the situation, foremost among which is the opportunity for justice
to take its course and for an unambiguous decision to be reached
with regard to the responsibilityof the perpetrators of such acts.
At the same time, Egypt Aas sought to spare the region any further
escalation of tension in a manner that would have deleterious
effects on the interestç of the fraternal people of Libya and on (Mr. Elaraby, Ewpt)
their aspirations after prosperity and development, in the first
instance,and on the stability and prosperity of the peoples of
neighbouring countries at a time when ever-greater hopes for peace,
justice and stability in the region çeem about to be realized after
long years of struggle, tension and armed conflict.
The ~ecurity Council is to vote today on a draft resolution
aimed at finding a solution to the problem created by the two
incidents,the Lockerbie flight and UTA 772, by intensifying
economic sanctions against Libya. Here, ,we have a question: Will
the tightening of sanctions lead to the truth? Egypt would have
~referred further efforts and further contacts in an attempt to
implement the resolutions adopted by the Council, for the
intensificationof sanctions wil1,surelyhave a negative impact on
the innocent and not necessarily lead to the truth regasding those
two incidents. (Mr. Elarabv, Esvpt)
For this reason, Egypt calls upon the Security Council to keep
in sight al1 the consequenees that will impact negatively on the
people of Libya and on the neiqhbouring peaples of the region.
Article 50 of the Charter stipulatesthat any State which finds
itsslf confronted with special economic problems arising fram the
carrying out of enforcernent measures against any State shall have
the right to consult the Security Council. This means that the
council should today consider alleviating the economic suffering
of ~ibya and of its neighbours that would arise from the adoption
of the draft resolution under consideration.
Despite the expected adoption of the draft resolutionon
today's agenda, Egypt will continue to deploy its efforts, in
ceoperation with al1 the parties concernad, in order to reach as
soon as possible a solution ta this criçiç that would safeguard the
interests of al1 and provide for the full implementationof the
Security Councilts reçolutions,which should be respected and
implemented,
The PRESIDENT: X thank the representative of Egypt for
his kind words addressed to me,
The next speaker is the representative of Suàan, who wishes to
make a statement in his capacity as Chairman of the Group of Arab
I invite him to take a place at
States for the month of November.
the Council table and to make his statement.
Mx. YASIN (Sudan) (interpretationfrom Arabic): 1 wish
to thank you, Sir, and through you the rnembers of the Security
Council, for giving me the opportunity to speak, on behalf of the
Sudan and the States members of the League of Arab States, on the
important issue before the couricil today. .I seize this oppostunity
to congratulate you most sincerely on your accession to the
presidency of the Security Council for this month, the work of
which iç replete with highly significant issues. (Mr. Yasin. Sudan)
1 also wish to congratulate your predecessor, Ambassador
Sardenberg, the permanent representative of Brazil, who discharged
his duties as President last month in an able and cornendable
manner .
The crisis between the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya on the one hand
and the United States of America, France and the United Kingdom on
the other, concerning the downing of Pan Am 103 and UTA 772, has
been dealt with by the Council for three full years. This crisis
figured prominently in the news media in a manner that qualifies it
to be cansidered as one of the most important legal disputes
between States both in terrns of the psinciples involvedand of its
position within the framework of international law. It is also an
important case in terms of the requirements of justice, such as the
availability of evidenee, neutrality and the removal of any
extraneous factors that might affect the case and consequently the
course of justice and, concomitantly,the nature of the verdict.
The Council is today dealing with an item that haç become
established on its agenda. This is an inescapablereality that
must be addressed. However, this should be done in consonance with
the spirit of the Charter and especially on the basis of Article 33
of Chapter VI of the Charter. It 1s relevant to point out here,
frorn the outset, that we aepreciate the fact that this dispute is
legal in nature and belongs in the courts and institutionsdirectly
çoncerned, and not in the Security councii, which is not mandated
by the Charter to exerçise such a funçtion. Now that the Council
is seized of this matter, the matter has, of necessity, become a
political dispute which we are uncertain as to whether it could be
addressed properly in its correct context, Here we should think of
similar conflict situations which could arise in the future and for
dealing with which the international community should establish
appropriate sules. (Mr. Yasin, Sudan)
The entire international communlty has been saddened by these
two tragedies. We'çondole wkth the families of the victirns and we
associate ourselves with those who condemn the perpetrators of
these two hideous crimes. We also unconditionallycondemn
terrorism in al1 its aspects. In this context, let us review the
course of events and positions since the Council fisst began its
consideration of this case.
The Council adopted resolution 731 (1992), which impoçed
specific sanctions against the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya. It
periodically reviewç these sanctions, on the basis of cooperation
or non-cooperationof the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya with the Council,
It is curious that this resolution is based on Chapter VI1 of the
charter, which addresses situations of aggreçsion that threaten
international peace and security, This does not ..pply to the
current dispute between Libya and the three aforementioned States
which is a legal dispute that has to do with the extradition of twa
Such a dispute should be dealt with in a
accused Libyan nationalç,
court of law, and specifically by the International Court of
Justice, Alternatively, it should be addressed in conformity with
Chapter VI of the Charter.
Having found itself caught up in these events, hou did Libva
respond? It responded comprehensively,with the aim of arriving at
the truth concerning these two regrettable incidents. ft called
for a legal, objective and neutral investigation regarding the
accusations levelledat its two Libyan nationalç. It expressed its
full willingness to accept the judgment of the International Court
of Justice in the relevant case of cornpetence now before the World
Court, It declared itself ready to consider any other proposals
made in conformity with the principles of law and Libyan
sovereignty. It expressed its eagerness to respond to
international efforts aimed at resolving the conflict through (Mr. Yasin. Sudan)
negotiations mediation and legal settlement, in accordance with
Article 33 of the United Mations Charter. (Mr. Yasin, Sudan)
~t expressly condemned terrorism and stated its willingness to
cooperate with any Party or with any international effort to
eliminate that phenornenon.
Tt declared its willingness for the two accuseà Libyan
nationals to surrender themselves voluntarilyto the
Secretary-General of the League of Arab States. It stated that in
the meantirne it would be willing to find a practicable way of
implementing resolution 731 (1992) in the context of international
law and justice and national sovereignty.
Libya also reaffirmed its eommitment to implement the findings
of the International. Court of Justice and its acceptance of .
Security Council resolution 731 (1992) in al1 its aspects. It
expressed its willihgness to cooperate with the Secretary-General
of the United Nations with respect to the legal aspects of the
resolutions in question and with respect to conducting a neutral
investigation or having recourse to a neutral court or
internationalcourt. Moreover, Libya took steps to implement that
undertaking; it called upon the United Nations to send a
fact-finding mission and solemnly undertook to pay compensation in
the @vent that it was iound sesponsible for the incident.
ft accepted al1 the demands calling for the trial of the two
accused and undertook to do al1 it could in the event that they
refused to place themselves before the court they are required to
submit to, and that despite the objection of the defence counsel of
the accused and despite the fact that that would not conform with
national and international laws applicable in such cases.
As a regional forum, the Arab League Council includes the Arab
States located in a sensitive area. By its mandate, it deals with
al1 issues of importance to the States of the-region. It (Mr.Yasin. Sudan)
pronounces itself on those issues and on the aspirations of those
States and is comitted to acting in the interests of its members.
The Arab League Council reacts tu events in the region and
expresses its views on them. The matter before the Security
Council today directly concerns a State member of the League of
Arab States. .
In conformitywith its responsibilitieaand its cornmitment to
peace and security in the region, the Arab League Council has
stated its increasing interest in this conflict and its willingneas
to provide its good offices and cooperate with the
Secretary-Generalof the United Nations and the Security Council in
resolvingthis deterioratingconflict.
In that context, the Arab League Councilhas fomed a
seven-member committee under the chairmanship of the
Secretary-General of the League of Arab States; the members are the
Foreign Ministers of Mauritania,Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, Libya,
Egypt and Syria. The committee was charged with following
developments and making the necessary contacts; it was to spare no
effort to stop the escalationof the crisis and find just and
peaceful solutionsin canformity with the rules of international
law, justice and the relevant internationaltreakies.
The Middle East standk at the threshold of new prospects,
Everyone hopes to see the culminationof new steps ta achieve a
just, lasting and comprehensive peace; this demands self-restraint
and the avoidance of any action that could escalate or multiply
tensions. In dealing with the crisis, the League of Arab States
was therefore careful to base itself on the United Nations Charter,
which stipulates that al1 internationaldisputes should be settled (Mr. Yasin, Sudan)
by peaceful rneans and without endangering internationalpeace and
security, and especially on Article 52 of the Charter.
The seven-member League of Arab States committee has submitted
its report to the Secretary-General of the League; this was
approved by the Arab League Council at its one-hundredth session,
held in September 1993 in Cairo, In itç report the committee
attached importance to the positive proposais included in Libyals
memorandum dated 11 September 1992 addressed to the
Secretary-General of the United Nations, which contained new
elements that would help find a settlement through dialogue and
negotiation. .The comittee voiced its concern at and its rejectian
of a policy of escalating threats and denials pursued by the three
parties, and called for a response to the positive initiativesand
efforts, including the importantLibyan memorandum submitted to the
Secretary-General.
The comittee expressed its determination tu continue its
efforts and its contacts with the Secretary-General and the members
of the Çecurity Council with a view to pseventing an escalation of
the crisis and to fostering constructive, positive dialogue towards
an appropriate settlement.
The committee chargea the Secretary-General of the League of
Arab States with intensifying his efforts and his contacts with al1
parties ta the crisis and with the Secretary-General of the United
Nations with a view to reaching a fair settlment based on the
prinçiples of international law and the need ta safeguard Libyan
sovereignty .
1 have gone into such detail with a view to stressing the good
intentions of the Libyan Arab Jarnahiriya and the efforts of the
League of Arab States and its Secretary-General, (Mr. Yasin, Sudan)
Mr. Ahmed Esmat Abdel Megiaid, and to underscore our sincere wish to
resolve this conflict within the frarnework of law and the
çovereignty of States. The Axab countries have always sought
justice and equality in al1 their dealings, anb have refrained from
applying double standards in dealing with issues. The Non-Aligned
Movernent and regional groupings includingthe Organizationof the
Islamic Conference and the Organization of African Unity have
expressed their concernwith respect to the difficulties faced by
the Libyan people as a result of the implementation of resolutions
731 (1992) of 21 January 1992 and 748 (1992). The people of Libya
have been subjected to actions that have crippled its economic
growth; theçe have asçailed vulnerable qroups such as children, the
ill and the aged. They have deprived the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya of
its legitimate right to contact the outside world by means of
available communicationchannels; this has hurled it back to a time
when communications wese extremely difficult.
The impact of the siege has gone beyond the people of Libya tu
affect neighbouring countries with social and cultural links to
that people. Article 50 of the Charter can be of only minimal help
to those who are suffering as a result of the implementation of
these resolutions.
A11 of this occurs as a result of the implementationaf
resolutions that appear to uphold the ruleç and to apply justice
but that are not based on the legal justifications that are
traditional for Eairness. (Mr. Yasin, Sudan)
The draft resalution before this distinguished gathering, in
our opinion, is not the best way to end the dispute. It will lead
to negative results: it could shake the confidence of the smaller
countries in this Council's neutrality when dealing with
controversial watters and because of overlapping competence of the
mechanisms engaged in the settlement of internationaldisputes, it
could pave the way for international and regional conflictç through
the prevention of action by the mechanisms that are closely related
to the issues.
The invariable principleç and rules of justice and public law
are violated when an adversaryis judge and jury and when the
accused is not presumed innocent until proven guilty. The
interpretation of legal texts and especiallyof the Charter is the
duty and competence of the courts, and'there is no way for any
other body to asrogate that competence to itself except by force,
The mechanisms for the settlement of disputes and the
preservation of international peace and security constantly can
fa11 victim to the impact of negative information by the media.
This leads to the absence of any guarantee for a fair trial that
woulà guarantee for the accused the right to appear before a I
neutral court, to be presumed innocent until proven guilty as well
as the right to thoroughly and sufficiently prepare their defence I
after being infarmed of the charges levelled at them and of the
evidence presented by the prosecution.
We leave this meeting with a feeling of immense sorrow at the
lack of a clear vision regarding an importantissue such as this
one, an issue which relates to the application of the noms of
justice and to respect for the sovereignty and sacredness of the
law and respect for the Charter which we have al1 accepted. The
Charter is binding because it stands for reconciliation between (Mr. asi in, &dan)
nations and is a voluntary contract between those who are parties
to it. It is upheld and its provisions are enforced so long na it
is uçed for the purposes it was formulated for.
The PRESIDENT: 1 thank the representative of the Sudan
for his kind words addressed to me.
It is rny understanding that the Council is ready to procerd to
the vote on the draft resolution before it, Unless 1 hear no
objection, I shall take kt that that is the case.
Tbere being no objection, it is so decided,
1 therefore put to the vote the draft resolution in document
S/26701.
A vote was taken bv show of hands.
In favou~: Brazil, Cape Verde, France, Hungary, Japan, H~~
Zealand, Russïan Federation, Spain, United
Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland,
United States of America, Venezuela
Aqainst : None
Abstaininq: China, Djibouti, Morocco, Pakistan
The PRESIDENT: The result of the voting is as f0llowr:
11 votes in favour, none against, and 4 abstentions. The draft
sesolution has been adopted as resolution 883 (1993).
In view of the lateness Of the hour, 1 intend to suspend the
meeting now. With the concurrenc.e of the members of .the Council,
the meeting will resume at 3.30 this afternoon. The rneetins was susnended at 1.35 D.m. and resumed at
3.50 p.m.
The: I shall now cal1 on those members of the
çouncil who wish to make statements following the vote.
Mrs. ALBRIGHT (United States of àmerica): The resolution
we have adopted taday demonstrates for al1 to see that this Council
is steadfast in its opposition to international terrorism. The
journey to this resolution has not been eaçy. But the path of
justice rarely is.
~itizens of 30 nations fell victim to the terrorist attacks
that destroyed flights Pan Am 103 and UTA 772. Nearly two years
ago, the Councll adopted resolution 731 (1992). Put simply, the
Libyan Government has refused to heed that resolution. Since then,
Libya has spared no effort to break this Couneilts reçolve, It haç
sought through intermediaries, surreptitiaus offers, and spurious
promises to compromise the will of the international comunity -
and to stave off todayms action.
The Council can be proud that Libyais efforts to stop this
resolution have failed. Terroriçm iç a challengeto every nation
in the world. My Government, in response, is determined to pursue
justice. And the pursuit of justice must, when necessary, include
mandatory sanctions of the Security council.
The fight against internationalterrorism must be a collective
effort. In working with the Governments of the United Kingdom and
France, the United States has led that effort. We have worked
closely with every rnember of the ~ouncil. The resolutionis
balanced and precisely targeted. Its hallmarks are an asçets
freeze, a lirnited equipment embargo against the Libyan oil industry
and the tightening of enrlier sanctions imposed under resolution
748 (1992). To those who çay it is not strong enough, I ask this:
Why did Libya try so hard to stop this resolution if the sting a£
its new sanctions is so mild? (Mrs. Albriaht, United States)
Libya knows what it must do to comply. We await the turnover
of thase indicted for the bombing of Pan Am 303. We await the
Libyan Government's cooperatian with the French judiciary. We
await compensation for the victims of Libyan terrorism. And we
await the Libyan Government's clear and confirmedrenunciationof
terrorism. (Mrs. Albrisht,
United States)
The United States has long imposed national sanctions against
~ibya that go far beyond those adopted by the Council. Still, the
United States has comitted itself to proceeding fairly and
equitably in the process leading to our vote today. We have
considered and respected the views of those countries whose
economic interests at stake might exceed Our own. This resolution
is directed at Libya, and Libya alone. For each day that passes
without the Libyan Governmentts cornpliance, the Libyan people will
pay a greater prlce,
Let me emphasize a beoader point. By strengthening sanctions
today, the Security Council has again shown the flexibility of
sanctions as a diplornatic tool; and the more we demonstrate that
this Council can impose, lift. suspend or strengthen sanctions at
will, the better the sanctions stick can serve our diplomacy.
~he tragic attacks against Pan Am 103 and UTA 772 struck at
innocent victims. Their families have awaited our response. T&ay
the Council iç responding. We must now await ~ibya~ cornpliance,
but we shall do so determined to persevere until justice is done.
Mr . MERIMEE (France) (interpretation fron French) : It is
regrettable that today our Council has had to adopt a resolution
tightening sanctions against Libya.
It is almost 20 months since the Seçurity Council requeçted
in sesolutions 731 (1992) and 748 (1992), that that State commit
itself concretely and definitively to cease al1 forms of terrorism
and ail assistance to terrorist groups; that it band over the two
suspects in the attack on Pan Am 103; that it fully meet the
requests of the French magistrat@ in charge of the investigation
inta the attack on UTA 772; 'and,finally, that it provide al1 the
evidence and al1 the information available to it regarding these
two crimes. (Mr. Mérimée, France)
Our three Govexnments had thought they could expect a swift
settlement of this ver.y painful matter, thus making it possible for
the families of the 441 victims of the attacks against the Pan Am
and UTA flights to obtain justice at last,
My delegation would like to express its great appreciation to
the Secretary-General, whose considerable efforts have been
thwarted by the evident bad faith of the Libyan authorities. They
have repeatedly made declarations of intent and have systematically
been evasive when the time came to act.
In their desire te reach a successful outcorne, my Government
and the Governments of the United Kingdom and the United States,
despite everything, decided to give that country a final chance to
prove its good wil1,by complying with its obligations before
1 October 1993. Unfortunately,the Libyan authorities have shown
yet again that they only desire to play for time, and they continue
their delaying tactics and their obstruction.
We consider that the LibyanGovernment has sought literallyto
take advantage of our Council. There is a clear contradiction
between the letters dated 29 September and 1 Qctober 1993 to the
Secretary-General from Libyavs Foreign Minister and
Colonel Qaddafi- latest positions, which close the door to any
solution. Libya may çtill'hope to have it believed that it is
prepared to do what the Security ~ouncil expects of it, but no one
can be duped any longer.
It was essential to respond. That is why we calmly but
resolutely censulted the other membexs of the Counçil about
strengthening the sanctions.
We are naw, much to Our regret, caught up in the logic of
escalation. My Government hopes that this reinforcement of the
sanctions, albeit moderate, will make the authorities in Tripoli
understand that the resolve of the international community and (Mr. Mérimée, France)
the Security Council is unflagging and that they will not be
satisfied by the indefinite continuation of the status quo.
The three sponsors of the resolutionhave been accused of
having a hidden agenda against the Libyan regime. The text of the
resolution that our Council has just adopted shows that that is not
so, and it paves the way fur a speedy solution. If the Libyan
Government cooperates effectively with my country1% judicial
authorities in the UTA 772 case, and if it handç over to the
competent courts the two suspects in the attack on Pan Am 103, the
Council will immediately be able to adopt a resolutken suspending
the implementation' of al1 the sanctions.
This is no empty offer. The entire mechanism set up by
resolution 731 (1992), resolution 748 (1992) and today's resolution
would cease to apply in those circumstances,and only a Security
Council resalution would reactivate it, if necessary.
We hope, however, that after this first decisive step Libya
will be anxious to achieve full reintegration into the
international cornmuniéy. Al1 it would have to do would be to
comply with its other obligations. The report then çubmitted by
the Secretary-General would allow the Security Council to take a
decision on the forma1 and final lifting of the sanctions regime.
Finally, 1 express the hope that the Libyan authorities will
heed our Council's message and will take the just measures expected
of them by the families of the victirns.
Sir David HANNAY (United Kingdom): It is now some 20
months since the adoption of Security council resolutian 748 (1992)
and nearly five years since the destruction of Pan Am 103 over
Lockerbie. The Libyan Governinent is still failing to comply with 1,
Security Council resolutionç and to recognize the determination of
the international community to fight internationalterrorism. That 1
has left no alternative to further sanctions.
.- (Sir David Hannav,
United Kingdom)
The objectives of the sponsors remain stsictly limited. They
are to secure justice for the victims of Pan Am 103 and UTA 772 and
to ensure that such atrocitiesdo not happen again. Central to
these objectives is that the two men accused of the Lockerbie
bombing should stand trial in Scotland or the United States and
that the dernands of French justice segarding the UTA case be met.
My Prime Minister and Foreign Çecretary have repeatedly given
assurances that if the two Lockerbie suspects went to Scotland they
would receive a fair trial, with the full protection afforded by
Scottish legal procedures. I now reiterate those assurances. My
Ministers have also made it clear that we are pursuing no hidden
agenda. Our agenda is set out in security Council resolutions
731 (19921, 748 (1992) and the present resolution - no more and no
less.
The new resolution adopts a carefully balanced approach.
Thus, in addition to the stick of further sanctions,there is also
a carrot: if the Secretary-General reports to the Council that the
Libyan Government has ensured the appearance of those charged with
the Lockerbie bombing before the appropriate United States or
Scottish court and has satisfied the French judicial authorities
with respect to the bombing of UTA 772, then the Security Council
will review the sanctions with a view to suspending them
immediately. We see this suspension of sanctionsas a preliminary
to their being lifted immediatelyLibya has complied fully wkth
resolutions 731 (1992) and 748 (1992). This new elernent, which was
not present in resolution 748 (1992), is designed to make it clear
that sanctions are not intended to punish; they are intended to
bring Llbya to cornpliance, and no more than that.
The resolution contains a grace period before the sanctions
corne into effect. There has already, in our view, been too much (Sir David Hannav,
United Kincrdom)
delay and prevaricationby the Government of Libya.
But, since our
sole aim is to resolve this issue, and not to impose sanctions for
the sake of sanctions, we have agreed to the grace period. We hope
Libya will toke advantage of this extra éime to hand over the two
Lockerbie suspects and satisfy the demands of French justice. Then
the new sanctions would never need to go into effect and the
existing ones could be suspended.
We are particularlygrateful to members of the Council, to the
Secretary-Gencraland to a nvmber of other Members of the United
Nations for supporting these resolutions and for seeking to
persuade the Libyan Government to çomply with them.
We hope they
will continue theis efforts. It is important not only to secure
justice for the victims of Pan Am 103 and UTA 772, but also to çend
a clear message tc current and would-be terrorists and sponsors of
terrorism: terrorism is a blight that the internationalcommunity
will neither condone nor tolerate, and it is not cost-free. Mr. SARDENBERG (Brazil): The action taken today by the
S@curitv* Council involves detemination of the existence of a
threat to international paace and security as a result of two
incidents of the utmost gravity, as it involves a n&er of legal
questions that have been the subject of controversial debate within
and outside this Council.
The terrorist attacks against pan flight 103 on
--
against UTA flight 772 on 19 September 1989, in which 171 people
Were killed, caussd the deepest outrage and sadneso in Btazil-
Those abominable, senseless, criminal acts have =eceivad the
strongest moral and political condemnation. And it could net have
been otherwise.
-ndeed. such crimes cal1 for resolute and effective action so
thst the persons responsible for them may be appropriately
Prosecuted and punished. This demand for justice is not only that
of the families and friends of the victims of those crimes; it is
widely shared by the whole international community and is vory much
the wholehearted sentiment of the Brazilian Goverment-
Brazil's support for the resolution that has just been adopted
1s an expression, in specific and clearly exceptional
circurnstances, of unswerving cornitment ta international
cooperation to eradicate the scourge of international terrorism.
That is, in our asses~mant, the political +hrust of this
resolution, and that i. what bas received Dur support.
It is our view that al1 resolutions of the Security Council
mUst be complied with. Resolution~ 731 (1992) and 748 (1992) -
both adopted at a time when Brazil was not a member of the Security
Council - are no different The fact that those resolution~ deal (Mir.Sardenberq, Brazil)
with a uniquely serious and complex case of international terrorism
makes it al1 the more important and urgent for this Council to
enforce cornpliance with its previous decisions on the matter, The
resolution now adopted Es directly linked to those previous
decisions, whose implementationit is intended to promote.
ft is also our vlew that the strong measures of sanction that
this ~ouncil is empowesed to impose under Chapter VI1 of the
charter constitute a last resort, to be used only in exceptionally
grave circumstances that involve a clear and direct threat to
internationalpeace and security. It vas thus only after carafully
pondering the extremely seriousnature of the case before us, as
well as the neqative consequences that would ensue should the
council be unable to act, that ve decided to cast a positive vote
on this resolution.
Having explained the reasonç for our political support for the
resofution, 1 wish to stress that our positive vote waç cast
without prajudice to our position on vaeious aspects of a legal
nature that are involved in the actions taken by the ~ouncil in
relation to thiç case. In this connection, Iwish to place sevesal
points on record.
It is our conçidered view.that efforts to combat and prevent
acts of international terrorism must be based an strong and
effective internationalcoopesation on the basis of the relevant
principles of international law and the existing international
Conventions relating to the various aspects of the problem of
internationalterrorism. The basic imperative in the prevention of
terroriçt acts of an international nature - as expressed, for
'xample, in resolution 44/29 of the United Nations General
Assembly - is that States must invariably fulfil theïr obligations (Mr. Sardenbera. Brazil)
under international law and take effective and resolute measureç to
prevent such actç, in particular by ensuring the apprehension and
prosecution or extradition of the perpetrators of terrorist acts.
The need to strengthen internationalcooperation in accordance
with these principles remains unchanged. As provided for in
Article 24 (2) of the Charter, the Security Council is bound to
discharge its responsibilities in accordance with the purposes and
principles of the United Nations. That means also that deciskons
taken by the Council, including decisions under Chapter VII, have
to be çonstrued in the light of those purposes and principles,
which, inter alia, rèquire respect for the principles of justice
and international law.
As waç noted by some delegations in statements made in this
Council on 21 January 1992, upon the adoption of resolution
731 (1992) , the exceptional circumstanceson which this case is
based make it clear that the action taken by the Council seeks to
address a specific political situation and is clearly not intended
to establish any legal precedent - especially not a precedent that
would question the validity of time-honoured rules and principles
of international law os the appropriateness of different domestic
legislations with respect to the prevention and elirnination of
international terrorism.
We are convinced that the imposition of sanctions must always
be linked to the performance of limited, concrete and very specific
acts that are made mandatory by decisions of the Security Council.
Such acts must be specifically set out by the Council su that the
State on which sanctions are imposed may be able ta know in
advance, and beyond al1 doubt, that the sanctions ni11 be lifted as
soon as those specific requirements are met, This was the view we
expressed, in çonnecticn with operative paragraph 16 of the (Mr. Sardenberq, Brazil)
resolution, in the consultations undertaken by the sponsors, and it
is the view we çhall take when it cornes to the practical
application of that paragraph.
Since this is the first time Brazil is addressing this
question in a formal meeting of the Security Council, ne believe we
should refer to our position in relation to the results of the
investigations that provide the basis for the requests referred to
in resolutions 731 (1992) and 748 (1942), as well as in the
resolution we have just adopted. The BrazilianGovernment has
studied carefully the documents submitted to the Security ~ouncil
by the States that have conducted those investigations. As the
Security Council cannot paçs judgement on the merits of a criminal
case, we understand that the action taken by the Council is aimed
excluçively at addreçsinga political problem involving a threat to
international peace and security. It cannot be construedin a
manner inconsistent with the presumption of innocence.
We note that operative paragraphs 3, 5 and 6 of the resolution
set forth decisions requiring measures by States to prohibit
certain acts by their nationals or from their territory. It ks the
understanding of the Brazilian Government that the words "theis
nationalsva, in that context, are to be interpreted as meaning
perçons under their jurisdiction. It is clear that the decisions
set out in those paragraphsdo not require or nuthorize States to
take any measures beyond their respective jurisdictions.
We understand that the initiativesthat Members States are
called upon to take ta encourage the Libyan Government to respond
effectively to Council resolutions, as expressed in operative
paragraph 15, are initiativessuch as those that have been carried
out by States so far, In the manner of good offices,to facilitate (Mr. Sardenbess, Brazil)
talks and diplornatic contacts leading to a peaceful solution of
this problem.
I also wish to indicate that my delegation is fully aware of
the need to address the consequences that may arise for third
countries from the masures provided Tor in this resolution should
the sanctions come into force. We therefore attnch great
importance to operative paragraph 10 of the resolution,which
entrusts to the cornittee establiçhed by resolution 748 11992) the
task of examlning possible requests for assistanceunder Article 50
of the Charter. As a member of the Security Council and of that
Cornmittee, Brazil will be attentive to this problei. and iill be
ready to work with other deleqations to seek effective ways of
dealing with this problem.
The question of ways and means of giving effect to the
provisions of Article 50 goes ne11 beyond this particular case. As
there is an increasing number of cases in whish sanctions are
apglied, there is also a proportionate need to examine ways in
which the United Nations can ensure more effective application of
Article 50.
Brazil voted in favour of this resolution in the hope that it
will not be ne,ceçsary for the sanctions to come into force. It is
indeed ouw hope that the period between now and 1 December, when
the new sanctions are to came into effect, will be profitably
utilized by the States involved - in particular,by Lkbya - to
achieve an early negotiated solution in full conformity with
Security Council resoluticns. We encourage the Secretary-General
to continue his efforts to facilitate such a solution. Mr. LI Zhaoxinq (China) (interpsetation from Chinese):
peace is the common aspiration of people al1 over the woxld, and
terrorist activities in any form are a great threat to people8s
peaceful lives. Since the tragic crashing of the Pan Am 193 and
UTA 772 flights, the chinese Goverment has on many occasions
strongly condemned these terrorist acts and expressed its profound
sympathy to the bereaved families and the victim countries. We
have always held that comprehensive,fair and objective
investigations should be conducted and that convicted ctirninals
should be duly punished in accordance with the principleç and
provisions of the United Nations Charter and relevant international
conventions. (Mr. Li Zhoaxins, China)
The disputes between States, no matter how complicated they
are, should be settled peacefully by diplornatic and political
means. We are opposed to the indiscriminateimposition of
sanctions on a country in the name of the United Nations. We made
our position clear, when resolution 348 (1992) was adopted by the
Council, that in pxinciple China was not in favour of impoçing
sanctions on Libya. Under the current changing circumstances we
are still not in favour of maintaining, let alone intensifying,
sanctions against Libya, In our view, the only effective means
that can lead to a solution of this question is negotiation and
consultation. To intensify sanctions against Libya will not help
to settle the question; on the contrary, it may further complicate
the matter, make the Libyan people suffer more, and create even
greater economic difficultiesfor the neighbouring and other
countries concerned. Therefore,the Chinese delegation was unable
to support the resolution adopted by the Council today.
Recently, the Libyan side has shown certain flexibility and is
willing to encourage the suspects to appear before the Scottish
courts. ft has also expressed its intention to negotiate with the
parties concerned to settle some specific issues. This positive
gesture dernonstrates that as long as the parties concerned show
sincerity and are able to negotiate in a calm manner there ni11
always be hope for a peaceful solution to the dispute.
Organizations such as the Organization of African Unity, the
League of Arab States and the Movernent of Non-Aligned Countries
have also expressed their willingness to contribute to the
settlement of the crisis that resulted from the above-mentioned air
crashes, and they have already made unrernitting efforts and
achieved certain results. Therefore, more time should be given for
their continuing efforts. We believe that these organizations, (Mr. Li Zhoaxins, China)
with their more frequent contacts and exchanges with the party
concerned, are in a better position to promote the settlement of
this question and will be able to play a more positive role.
In arder to brlng an end to the crisis and ease the tension,
the Secretary-Generalhaç overcome many difficulties and has been
tireless in his mediating efforts. These efforts should also
continue so as to help the parties concerned remove their
differences and settle the remaining issues at an early date.
At the present stage, while recognizingthe difficulties we
are facing in solving the problems, we should also be aware of the
existing opportunitieç. As long as we allow sufficient time for
diplornatic efforts and have enough patience there is hope for a
compromise acceptable to all, thus avoiding the imposition of
upgraded sanctions and their adverse consequences. We therefore
strongly urge the parties concerned to adopt an attitude of
flexibility and compromise in order to create the necessary
conditions for a final settlement.
Mr. VORONTSOV (RussianFederation) (interpretation £rom
Russian): The Russian delegation supported the draft resolutisn
adopted by the Council, which was sponsored by the United Kingdom,
the United States and France, since it fully concurs with its
reiteratian of the resolve ok the Security Council to eradicate
international terrorism.
In combating this evil, which has becorne the real blight or
leprosy of the twentieth century, there can be no vacillation.
Combating international terrorksm and violence is for us a key
tenet deriving, not snly from the moral underpinningsof the policy
of a new Russia, but unfortunately from the realkties of the
contemporary world. We are therefore anxiousto work and to
cooperate with the world community in putting an end to acts of (Mr. Vosontçov. Russian Federation)
international terrorism which, as appropriately emphasized in the
resolution just adopted, is essential for the maintenance of
international peaçe and security.
We are deeply convinced that Security ~ouncil resolutions
731 (1992) and 748 (19921, adopted with a view to bringing to
justice those accused of planting an explosive device on board
Pan Am flight 103 and UTA flight 472, must be implemented. The
suspects must be brought to trial, and until that happens the
sanctions mechanism should continue in effect.
As far as the nature of the sanctions is concerned, the
Russian Federation attaches pasticular importance to that provision
in the resolution which affirmç:
". .. that nothing in this resolution affects Libya" duty
sçrupulously to adhere to al1 af its obligations concerning
servicing and repayment of its foreign debt;" (resolution
883 (19931, para. 11)
We believe that this is an extremely important provision, the
purpose of which is to ensure that as a result of the additional
sanctions imposed on Libya, the interests of other States would be
harmed as little as possible.
We hope that Tripoli will treat the resolution we have adopted
with all due seriousness, will draw the necessary conclusions, and
shortly - it has until 1 December - take steps to comply with the
legitimate demands of the Security Ccuncil. That will. initially,
make it possible immediately to suspend the sanctions and then to
consider the question of lifting them completely. It is our belief
that that is in the interests of both Libya and the entire
international community. Mr. YMEZ BARHUEVO (Spain) (interpretation from Çpanish):
The ~ecurity Council has just adopted a resolution which we had
hoped would not have become necessary. Unfortunately, a year and a
half after their adoption, resolutions 731 (1992) and 748 (1992)
have still not been properly complied with. Despite the determined
efforts of the Secretary-General,to whom we wish to express our
special appseciation, and the efforts of States and organizations,
particularlythe League of Arab States, which are interested in a
speedy solution of the crisis, we must note that Libya has not
fully complied with the demands set forth in Secuxkty Council
resolutions 731 (1992) and 748 (1992).
In those circumstances, the adoption af a new resolution was
inevitable, First, it is necessary to ensure respect for the
obligation imposed by the United Nations Charter on al1 Member
States to comply with decisions of the Security~obncil. Secondly,
the events that led to resolutions 731 (1992) and 748 (1992) are
particularly serious. The attacks against commerçial flights of
Pan Am and UTA are horrendous crimes, which caused numerous
innocent victims, and their presumed perpetratorç must be bsought
to justice.
As the representative of Brazil has pointed out, the Security
Council is taking action in order to deal with a decision that
affects international peace and security, without prejudice to the
principle of the presumption of innocence as regards the persons
concerned. These are the reasons that prompted my delegation to
vote in favour of resolution 883 (1993), which has just been
adopted by the Council. This resolution,though as firm and
vigorouç as is necessary to attain its objective - namely to ensure
cornpliance with the Council's requirements - nevertheless contains
an element of flexibility providinq an appropriate way out of the (Mx..Yanez Barnuevo. Spain)
crisis if there is sufficientwill on the part of the Libyan
authorities to do so.
It is true that through this resolution naw sanctions are
imposed upon Libya, but it is also true that mechanisms are
provided to suspend them and also to litt al1 the sanctions
established Immediately, once there is cornpliance with the
requirements of the Council. Horeover,a time period is
established which would make it possible to avoid the entry into
force of the new measures if Libya fulfils its obligations by
1 December next . (Mr. Yaiïez Barnuevo, Spain)
We would now encourage the Secretary-Generalto redouble his
efforts, which were so close to bearing fruit, until it does so.
We also encourage the States and organizationsthat can contribute
to finding a solution to the crisis ta lend the Secretary-General
their coaperation.
~t the same tike, we would urge the Libyan Government to
pursve the course set forth in its letters of 29 September and
1 October 1993. We were encouraged by the assurance given the
Council today by the PermanentRepresentative of Libya that his
Government will continue to ~00perate with the Secretary-General in
. seeking a definitive solution te the problem.
To that end, the Libyan authorities must comply with the
provisions of paragraph 16 of resolution 883 (1993), just adopted,
and in particular must do everything necessary to ensure that the
two persons charged with the bombing of Pan Am flight 103 do indeed
appear before the Scottish courts, as well as to satisfy the
requests of French judicial authorities with respect to the bombing
of UTA flight 772.
In the unfortunate event that that does not take place by
1 December and the new measures therefare enter into force, the
Counçil undertakes in the resolution just adopted to consider the
economic problems that may confront States partlcularlyaffected by
the implementation of those measuses. Similarly,under the
sesolution the Council instructs the Cornittee established by
resolution 748 (1992) to examine possible requests for assistance
that,may be submitted by such States under the provisions of
Article 50 of the Charter and to make recommendationsto the
President of the Security Council for appropriate action. The
Councbl thus continues a practice followed in ather cases in which (Mr. Yafiez Barnuevo, Spain)
enforcement measures were adopted that could have a negative effect
on the economies of Member States! a practice that will undoubtedly
facilitate cooperation by those States in irnplementing such
measures and that my country wholeheartedly supports,
Spain sincerelyhopes that we will not reach that point. We
hope that Libya wilL comply with the Counciltsrequirements,
thersby resolving a crisis that is causing considerablahan' not
only to the Libyan people but to other peoples, includingmy own,
in the Mediterranean region, which is not exempt from problems that
need to be appraached through internationalcooperation in a North-
South context. Som@ very hopeful initiativesthat have been
launched in recent years have been affected by this crisis. We
would hope that the situationwill be resolved as soon as possible
for the sake of the full development of that rnuch-needed
cooperation between the two shores of the Mediterraneanfor the
benefit of their peoples and of the internationalcommunity.
Mr. ERDOS (Hungary) (interpretationfrom French) : Hungary
vigorously and unreservedly condemns al1 forms of international
terrorism. We are deeply convinced that the international
community must do everything, within the framework of global and
regional cooperation, to combat and eradicate that serious
phenomenon, which knows no Borders. This position of principle
detemines Hungaryms attitude towards the problern wlth which we are
dealing today: the terrorist acts perpetrated against the Pan àm
and tFTAflights.
We regret that, because of delaying tactics and
unkept promises and the growing gap between verbal statements and
concrete actions, this item is still on the Council's agenda. We
regret that for the third tkme the Council has had to meet to
review the situation. The reason for this is Libya's failure,
despite persistent efforts by the Secretary- I (Mr. Erdos . Hunqarv)
General, the countries members of the Arab League, and other States
concerned, to comply with Security ~ouncil resolutions 731 (1992)
and 748 (19921, adopted, respectively, in January and March last
year .
~t iç clear that the Council had na choice but to adopt new
measures to ensure respect for its two earlier resolutions. At the
4
same time, as in other sirnilar cases, we cannot conceal our regret
that we have had to have recourse to Chapter VI1 of the Charter tu
tighten the sanctions impused on a Member Çtate of the
organisation, particularly since that State is a country with which
Hungary has long had mutually advantageous economic çooperation.
We would hope that the Libyan Gavernment will make use of the
period between now and 1 December, the date on which the resolution
we have just adopted will enter into force, to comply with the
relevant security Counckl resolutions,which might make it
unnecessary éo irnplement todayts resolution. We çhould also like
to draw attention to paragraph 16 of the resolution, under which
the couneil expresses its readineçs to seview the sanction measures
with a view to suspending and, possibly, lifting thern. We are
confident that Libya will make use of al1 available possibilitles
to extricate itself from the present situation and thereby enable
the Security council to determine that the circumstancesthat
caused the imposition of such measures againçt that country have
ceased ta exist.
In that spirit, and for thoçe reasons, Hungary deçided to vote
in favour of resolution 883 (1993), in the hope that the day is not
toa far off when it will be possible to restore normal relations
with Libya in every sphere. Mr. TAYLHARDAT (Venezuela) (interpretation from Spanish):
Venezuela condemns terrorisrn in al1 its forms, regardless of itç
sponsors or the causes that are alleged to justify it, be they
political, economic, social, religious or of any other kind. That
is a position my country has consiçtently upheld in al1
international forums.
Accordingly, we have supported international measures and
initiatives aimed at combating and eradicating that hateful form of
struggle. Terrorism is a cowardly act, one that cloaks itself in
anenymity, sacrifices human life and wreaks destruction to achieve
its goals, with total contempt for the most basic individual
rights.
As is pointed out in General Assembly resolution 44/29, acts
of international terrorism not only reçult in irreparable loss of
human life and in material damage but also have a deleterious
effect on international relations because of the harm they do to
internationalpeace and security. This is reflected in the
resolution we have just adopted, which has its roots in deplorable
acts of terrorism whose scope has led the international community,
represented in the Security Council, to adopt measures to ensure
that those charged nith such abominable actions are brought to
justice and punished to the full extent of the law.
My delegation would have preferred that the situation referred
to in the resolution just adopted be resolved without the need to
resort to the application of such severe measures as those set
forth in it.
Venezuela was heartened when, as noted in the seventh
preambular paragraph of resolution 883 (1993), the Government of
Libya stated its intentionto encourage thsse charged with the
bombing of Pan Am flight 103 to appear for trial and its
willingness to cooperate with the French authorities in elucidating
the case of the bornbing of UTA flight 772. (Mr, Tavlhardat. Venezuela)
Unfortunately, those charged did not appear. This fact,
together with the lack of a full and effective response to the
1
requestç and decisions contained in Security Council resolutions
731 (1992) and 748 (1992) , has led the Council to adopt today's
resolution, which provides for new and more drastic measures. The
purpose of these measures is to demonstrate the international
comrnunity's firm resolve to punish those guilty of committing acts
of terrorism.
In voting in favour of resolution 883 (1993), my deleqation
hopes and trusts that the alleged perpetratoss of these acts will
'appear before the competent court before the expiration of the
deadline set for the entry into force of the measures provided for
in the resolution.
We appeal to al1 the parties involvedin this problem to
continue to demonstrate the spirit of compromise they have shown so
far in the quest for a solution in harmony with the spirit and
purpose of the various resolutions adopted by the Councll on this
subject.
In conclusion,we express to the Secretary-General our
gratitude for the important role he has played in regard to this
problem, We believe that he has not yet exhausted al1 his
possibilities for action and we trust that he will continue to
exert efforts to secuse the cooperation of the Libyan Arab
Jamahiriya in the'quest for a solution that will render unnecessary
the implementationof the measures provided fox in this resolution
and lead to the lifting of the measures imposed by previous
resolutions of the Council.
Mr. MARUYAMA (Japan): Since last yeas, many Governments
and organizations, including the League of Arab States, as well as
the Secretary-General of the United Nations, have been trying to (Mr. Haruvama,Jawan)
gain the cooperation of Libya in an effort todclarify the factç
surrounding the downing of Pan Am flight 103 and UTA flight 772,
among whose victims was a Japanese national.
Japan, which is strongly opposed to terrorism in al1 its
forms, has appealed repeatedlyto the Libyan Governmentto comply
with Security Council resolutions 731 (1992) and 748 (1992). It is
indeed regrettable that, despite such endeavours,Libya has failed
to comply with the Security Ceuncilas requirernents and has
continuously tried to avoid its internationalobligationsthrough
equivocation and delay.
Last year, at.the time that resolutions 731 (1992) and
748 (1992) were adopted, it was understood that the Security
Council would be compelled to take further measures if Libya did
not comply with them. Now, unfortunately,the council has had no
choice but to adopt further meaçures\..t oain Libya s compliance.
Japan urges the Libyan Government to comply fully with the
relevant Security Council resolutionswithout further delay. It is
in the hope of gaining this compliance that my delegation supported
the adoption of this new resolution. Sn the meantirne, Japan
remains committed to efforts to find a solution to this difficult
situation and, indeed, to eliminate al1 foms of international
terrorism.
Mr- MAFtKER (Pakistan): Pakistan has consistently and
vigourously condemned terrorism in al1 its foms and
manifestations. This includes the abominable acts perpetrated
against Pan Am flight 103 and UTA flight 772.
Pakistan has always also upheld the sanctity of the
resolutions of the General Assembly and the Security council and
has consistently supported complete and faithful adherence to them. (Mr, Marker, Pakistan)
We have therefore SC~U~U~OUS~~ abided by the terms of Security
Council resolution 748 (1992).
We regret that the sincere and dedicated efforts that were
undertaken by the Secretary-Generalof the United ~ations and a
number of well-intentionedGovernments to find an amicable solution
to the problem of meeting the requirements of Security Council
resolution 731 (1992) appear ta have been unsuccessful. However,
we have not lost hape and feel that these endeavours should
continue.
The PRESXDENT: There are no furthes names on the list of
speakers. The Security Council has thus concluded the prekent
stage of its considerationof the item on itç agenda.
The rneetinq rose at 4.45 p.m,.. Exhibit 34
Resolution 286, United Nations Security Council,
1552nd meeting, 9 September 1970RESOLUANIDNSISIONS
OFTHEECUR IYNCIL
1970
UNITEDNATIONS
NYork, 1971 Th Securie CoUncil,
Grmely concerd at thethreat toinnocent civilirin
lives fiom the hijackhg of aireraftand any 0th
interferencin internationaravel,
1. Appeais to aliparties concenid for the im-
mediate release of ailpassengersand crews without
exception,heldas a resulof hijacfüngand otherinter-
ferenceininternationalttavel;
2. CdLson Statesto takeailpossibleIegalstepsto
preventfurther hijackings or any otber interference
with internationalciviairtravel.
Adopred at thlS5tn deci-
ing.4Q Exhibit -35
Note by the President of the Security Council
{UnitedNations Document S/17554; 9 October 1985) SecurityCouncll Distr.
GENERRL
S/17554
9 October 1985
ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
NOTE BY THE PRESIDEWT OF THE SECURITY COUNCIL
At the 2618th meeting of the Security Council, on 9 October 1985, the
mesident made the following statement on behalf of the members of the council:
"The rnernberç of the Security Counçil welcorne the news of the releaçe of
the passengers and the crew of the cruiçe ship Achille Lauro and deplore the
reported death of a paçsenger.
"They endorse the Secretary-General'ç statement of 8 October 1985, which
condemns al1 acts of terrorksm.
"They resolutely condemn this unjustifiable and criminalhljacking as
well as other acts of terrorism,includinghoçtage-taking.
"Tbey also condemn terrorism in al1 its forms, wherever and by whornever
comrnitted." Exhibit 36
Resolution 579, United Nations Security Council,
2637th meeting, 18 December 1985RESOLUTIO ANSDDEClSlONS
OFTHE SECURITCYOUNCIL
1985
SECURlTYCOUNCIL
OFFICIALRECORYEARORTIETH
UNITNATIONS
New 1986,- -
STATEhfENT BY THE PRESIDENT
mR DAT'ED16 DECEMBER 1985FROM THE PERMANENT REPRESENTATIVE OF THE UNITED
STATES OF AMlsRICA TO THE UNITEDNATIONS ADDRESSm T6 THE PRESIDEIY TFTHE SECU-
RIT'YCOUNCIL
w
At its2637th meetingon 18 December 1985,the of18Dmnikr fm
Louncîlprocttdedwiththediscussionoftheitementi-
ticduLttttdated 16Decernber1985 fromthe Pema- The Smrify Couneil*
nmt RepreentativeoftheUnite Sdtateof Americato dùt~bed atthe prevdenŒof incidents of
the UnitedNationsaddressaitothe Presidentofthe hostage-takinand abduction,severalof whichareaf
SccuntyCounçilIS/17685)n.'0P protractedurationand have hcludd lossof life,
Conrideringthatthetaking ofhostagesandabduc-
tionsarcoffencesofgraveconcernto theinternational
ccirnrnunit,avingseve reversconsquençarforthe
rightsofthe victimsandforthepromotionof friendly
relationsandceoperationamong States,
Recaliinthe staternentof9 October 1985by the hostagesandabdudedpersonswhereverand by whorn-
PresidentoftheSecuritCounciI,resolutelycondemn- evertheyareking held;
ingdl actof terrorismincIudinho~tage-t&ing,'~~ 3. Affirm theabligatioaof dStatesinwhose ter-
Recalfingah resolution40/of 9December 1985of ntaryhostagesorabduaedpersonsareheld urgentlyto
theGeneralAssembly, takediappropriaterneasuresosecur teeisaferelease
Bearinginmind theInternationClonventioagainst andto preveutheçcimmissionofactsof hostage-taking
the Taking of Hostages.adopted on 17 December and abductioninthefuture;
1979,1Qhe Conventionon thePreventionand Punish- 4. Ap*a& toaU Statwthathavenot yetdoneso to
ment ofCrimes againstInternationaiPtotec3ePer- considerthepossibiiityof becomingpantostheInter-
sons nçludingDipIorna* Agents adoptedon 14 De- nationC aonvention againsttheTakingof Hostage,
cemk 1973,'a1the Conventionforthe Suppression theConventionon thePreventionand Punishment of
ofUnlawful Acts againstheSafetyof Cid Aviation, CrimesagainsiInterntionalyrotectePersons,indud-
signedon 23 Septemkr 1971,'0the anvention for ingDiplornatiAgents,theConventionfortheSuppres-
theSuppressionofUnlawfulSeiniorfeAireraft,signcd sionofUnlawfulActsagainst @eSafety of CiviAvia-
on 16 Deoember1970,'0'and other relevanconven- tion, the ConventionfotheSupprasion ofUnlawful
tions, Seinrrof Aircrafand otherrdcvantconventions;
1. Condemns unequivocaliyal1 am of hostage- 5. Urges the furthedevelopment of international
takingandabduction; cwperation arnangStatesin devisingand adopting
2; Calls,for the immediate safe release ofalI effectivemwsures which arein accordancewith the
des ofinternationalaw tcfacilitatethprevention,
prosecutionand punishmentof aïiactsof hostage-
101Sep. 24StatemebythPresidcnt. takingandabductionasmanifWons of international
1°3Gaierai Asscrcsolution3166(XXVIII), anna. terrorism.
"'UnitadNations. TreufySer974,No. 14118,p.178. Adoptai unanimourfy ai rhe
YniteNacionTmfy &fieerlm. No.1Ut5p.105. 2637thmeeting. Exhibit 37
Resolution 635, United Nations Security Council,
2869th meeting, 14 June 1989RESOLUTIO ANNDDEClSlONS
OFTHE SECURITCYOUNCIL
1989
SECURITYCOUNCIL
OFFIRECOR.FORTY-YEARTH
UNITEDNATIONS
New L990,1 MARKING OP PLASTIC OR SHEET EXPLOSïVES FOR THE PURPOSE OF DETECTION
Concerned about theeasewithwhich plasticosheet
explosivescabeused inacrsofterrorismwithlitderisk
Ar its 2859tmeeting,on 14June1989, theCouncil ofdetecrion,
discussedtheitementitled "Markinolplastios sheet Takinnote of the InternatioCiriIAviationOrga-
explosivesforthepurposeof detedion. nization Council resolution 16 February1989, in
whichiiurged its member Statesto expediteçurrent
researchand developrnenton detectionofexplosives
andon securitequipmcnt,
, ResolutiC 635(1989)J 1. Condemnsal1 acts of unlawful interference
againsthesecurityof civil aviation;
2. Cal& uponal1Statestoco-operateindevisingand
implementingrneasvrestoprevental1actofterrorisrn,
includinthoseinvolvingexpiosives;
Comciow of theimpIicationofactsofterrorismfor 3. Welcomesthe work aIreadyundertakenby the
internationasecurity, IntemationalCiviAviationOrganization,andbyoother
Deeplyeonçemedby al1actofunlawfu1 interference intemationalorganisations,airned apreventingand
againstinternationalcivilaviation, eliminatingalacts of terrorisminparticularinthe
Mindfu of the importanrole of thUnited Nations fielofaviationsecurity;
insupportingand encouragingeffortby a1Statesand
intergovernmentalorganizatiansin pzeventing and tionto intensibitsworkaimed atpreventingalactsof
eliminatinal1actsofterrorisrni,ncludthoçe involv- terrorisragainst internationcivil aviatioand in
ing theuseof expbsives, particulaitwork on devisinganinternationalrkgime
Deremined toencourage thepromotion afeffective forthe rnarkingof plastior sheetexpIosivesforthe
masures ta preventactsof terrorism, purposeof detection;
5. 61%~a ~IIStatesandin particulartheproduceas InternationalCivil Aviation Organizationand other
ofplastior sheetexplosivestointensifyresearchinto competenr international organuations, an interna-
neans of makingsuch explosivesmore easildetat- tionalrégimeforthernarkinof plasticorsheetexplo-
able,andta co-operate in this endeavour; sives fthepurposeof deteaion.
6, Ca& upon al1States tsharetheresuItçof such
researchandcro-operatiwith aviewtodevisingin the
19 Exhibit 38
Resolution 687, United NationsSecurityCouncil,
2981st meeting, 3 April 1991RESOLUTIONS AND DECISIONS
OF THE SECURITYCOUNCIL
1991
UNITEDNATIONS
NewYo1993 Redhg itresolutioû!B (1990of2 A~gir~1990,661
(1990)of 6 August lWt 66/lWû) of9 August1990,664
(lm of18Augw 1990,65 (5990)of25Avgust 1990,666
(19i0ofU September1990.667(1'39)f16SepWbet 1990,
669(19%))of24Sepiembzr1i90.670(1990of22 Sepkmbet
1990,674(lm of29 October1990,67(1990o)23Ncmm-
ber 1940,67(8990)of29 November1990and696(lm11 of
2 March1991.
W , therestorationtWaÏt of mvereignty.
independenceandtemtorialintee and theretumof h
legjtimaGavement,
AfFmUlgthe wmmitmeur ofaliMmber Statesto the
swereignryt,emtarilotegrand politicbBependeaceof
KuwaitauclIraqmd notingtheintentionexpressbythe
Mmber StattcooperatinwitKuwaitunderpqph 2of
mEutioa 678(1990)tobriaFheirmiiitpresencem IraIO
anend as soou aspossibleamsistent wip-pb 8 of
resoIuti686 (1991),
Rea@miq the nd to be asairdofIraq%peaeTul
intentionsthelighofits uniawfinvarioandoaaipatim
ofKuwait,
Tm noteoftheletterdat27 Rbmq 1991hm the
ihputyPrimeMinisteandMrmst errE"o~eiAnffairshq
aâdd tothePresidmtoftheMty Camcil4d ofhis
leftersothe samedate addresd tothe Wat ofthe
Cwincii amittheSeeretary-cteneand?thcihttersdared
3 bfarchY4 5 M&'' headdffssedto them ,iasuanto
resolaai686 (14191)*
NottqttiaIraqandKuwait, asindependentswweign
Statcs6iggtatBaghdadon4 Oaober 1963"Apd MinutcJ
tbtShteofKirwaitndtheRepuIAiofIre qrgarding
tbeirstoratioll of fimlatiarrqmmgnkion aadrelated
rnatter~th- forme v&g le bomhy bttweai
Ira qad KIrwaitadthe all~hn of isl& whichAgrted
Minutesti~~regktemd4ththeUnitedNationinamofdarice
4thArtide 102oftheQlarrerofthe UniteNatioas4 in
whnbIraq remphxi th mdependenŒad odmpletsdvier-
t'$pyofIheSiate ofEtuwaitwithitJboimdaMsarspoeifiediï~
theletteoftbRime MinisteroIrsda!ed21Jdy 1932and
asaopept bettirciçofKuwaitinhi kttedatcd10Augnst
5932,
t3dm oft&eneedfordemaratkmof ~ICd hmd-
ary.
-ah ofthestatemwtbyIraqthreatenhgtuse
wapons inncdaticrofitobliitjOfunderthePtdoool for
fh~hhi'bith of&C U!SklWU ofemll!h&
or OtherGtmz~andof BaaeridogicaMetbodsof Warfarr,
sigridatGaievaon 17 Jime1925,amndof its priiisof
chemid~mespons.andafnrmingthagmwoonssquc~a~~Wd
foh my furtheusebyIra qfsuchmapans,
thaIraqhassubscni to thFiai Dodaration
ad- byailStateparticipergnthcÇwfemce ofSwcs
Partiestotbe 1925GcnevaProrocd and Othe?late&
StaterhcldinPa& hm 7 to 11 Jan- 1989mmestablamg
the0bjeah-ofuniverseImiinatioi&mieal ancibiological 6. Notes thaassoon asthe Secretary-Genenotities additionlmtiom designateclbtheSpeaaî
the Counçilofthecompletiofthedeploymwt ofthe United Commissionunderparagrap(i) andthdestmc-
Nationsokrver unit.theconditio41 beestablkheforthe tionbyLraq u.derthesuperrisiontheSpeciai
Mernkr StatecooperatingwithKuwaitm amordance witb Commissian, aIIitsissilecapabilitinclud-
resolutim678(1990) tbringtheitmilitpfesencinIraqto inglaunders,asspecifunderparagraph8(b);
anend consistewithremlutio686(1991);
The provisiobytheSpecialCommissionto the
(ru)
Di~ctorGened of the InternationAtomic
&ergy Ageacy oftheassktanŒandmpetat ion
7. In* Iraqtorem uwwnditiandlyitsbiigations requd à paragraph12 and 13;
under tfie Protofor the Rnhibitiontbe UseinWar of
Asphyxiatin, oisonouormer G- andofBaefefiogieal 10. k5& Jwfhe tai Iraq&al1uriconditionaynder-
Methodsof Warfaresiped atGenm w 174ime lm? md taknot tousedwelop, wmd oracquireanyof the items
to ratifythConventionon theProhibitiof theDeveEq- speezedin pqphs 8 aud9. aadrequcststhe SBcretary-
ment.RDdudionandStoekpiiingofBacierAogic(Biologir;al) Gened. incmsultatioo with thSpecid Cornmisim. to
andTain Weapm andon ïheir Destrtl~tioo.ofApd dwelp a planfothefuture angomgmanitorhgandverifica-
19n6l tiuof Iraq'scomplianŒwïththe preseat pmgraph,tobe
subittedtotheGund forappd witbinonehimdredand
8. &&da chat Iraqshall uacoadithalaeoept the twenty daof thepassagof thepresei resolutioa;
de~tmion. remmal,orrenderingadesuader internationai
supetnsi. of: 11.fmiir ïrsato~a@m wmnditiondiy iloMigariom
der theTreatyontheNm-ProliferationofPlucIWeaps.
(a)AU chernicalandbioIogicalmapansd ailstoeof of1JuiylmQ
agentsd ail relared sumems and ~omponeetsanddi
ma& dwelopment, supportandmarrufacmiq facilities 12 * tbaLtra q dl umxlodithallyagre eQtto
relatetdereto; aequk ordevelonpueleaweapoosornudear-weapoa-usable
matMa1 orasy mwms or compnezltsoranyreseareh.
(b) AUballisticmissiwitb arangepater thauone dewiapment,wippoaormaauEaEnuin facilhiesreIaeothe
himdred and BQ kilometrq andrelated majorpartaud am to atimittothe Senetary-Gmeralandtbe Director
repairandprodudionfaditiw Geaeralof thchterriatiodAmmîc Energy Ageq within
üfka dayosftheabpia~ oftée p-t remlutionaddar-
9. &des &, fortheImplementatioofpaqmph 8, atioaofthel~ca~amoimtsdrypesofallitems~
thefollowing: abrrrie*ke ad ofits~-wapoa-l~~aMe materialsunder
thedmk #111tm1,ocmtody andremd, ofthe Agenq,
(a) haq &dl nibit to ttie SeeRtaqhral. within withthe&sîme ad cooperatiaaoftheSpecialt3mmimon
ilfteedq of theadoptioa ofthe p-t duth a aspmvidedform theplanoftbebtary-Gtoeral dd
declarath on theIocatiumamomts ad typeosfdl item m pamgmph 9 (b)toaoeepti,aoeordlmŒwith the mp-
specinedm paragaph8 andap tourgenonaite mspeEtion menu p d fotinp-ph U, urgenton-sitinspeaion
asspecifieblaw: ad thedesta moval orreüderm hgrmlesasappmpri-
9teofdl item pacifiedab; and to wt the plandis-
' (b)The Secmary-Cienerd.m Eonsultatim wifbtbe & impaqmph l3 forthefutureongohgmmitohg and
appropriateGawrnments and,where appmprbte,with the WE%& ofitmsplk withthesedertakiags;
Direaor-Genei-alothe World He& Orgdicm, within
forty-i5vedaofthe adoptioof thepmt ~Iuth &al1 13. RrgirattheDh3or Geatral oftheInternational
dwew ad submititothe Chmd forapptws alplanding ~cE~~A8wcy.tbrwghtôeSeaetary-Geneg wsth
fortheampletion ofthefoilowiaa& withinforty-hdays theda and~mperath oftheSpeaa lammisnop as
ofsuch appmal: provia foritheplanoftheSecretary-Generairefemtoin
pampaph 9 (b)tacay outmunediateoa-sitiaspectioof
(i) The formingofaspoeial~nmispimwhieh&al1 Ireqnuscieu apbiliksbasedon Iraq 'sdarationsanthe
carr yutmimediatecm& Inspeniuof Ir+ desiph ofaayadditional-tiow bytheSpeciaiCommis-
biologkal.cbemid and mküe capabilitk, ~m; tod-1- a planforsu~ao tothe Couitciwithia
bad onIraq*d $eciaratîosd thedesipation forty.6day salliq Ethedmniction.remavalorrendering
ofanyaddiionailocatk bythe+al cmmb bamh asappmpriateof aiitemlistem wgraph 12;to
sioa iWE uvry outtbeplm iliwitnrty-lkdaysfollowingaval by
Le (hmd aadto dmelop a plantakinghto accountthe
(ii) The yieldibngIraqofmion totheSpccial rigb andobügatisnof IÏaqder the T~ary on theNon-
Commisrionfordestnictm imaovairrendet. Pmliferab of NucltarWeapaa9. for thefuture ongohg
ing hannlesgtakinintoaecouattherequk- monitorinad verifiath oIraqcornplianceithparagraph
ments of publiesafety.of al1item specified12indudmg aninvw~toyofainuclearrnatwialiïrasubject
uader paragmph 8 (a)Hidudinghem at the totùc Ageacy'verifiatioaadhpxtbns toconfimi thatAgeacy safeguardcmer aIrelevautnucIearactintinIraq.
tobembmitted totheCoud forapprwal withinonehundred
andtwenty daysOFthe adoptionothe presentresolution;
20.Defides.effectiveimmediatethat theprohibitions
14. Noiestbattheactionto betaken byIraqinpara- agaimtthe saleor supplyto Iraqof mrnaiities or pdum
graphs&to 13=-nt sîep towah thegodofestaMimg other tban medicine and healtb supplies, and prohibitions
inthe MiddleJ%slazone free frwagons ofmassdestruc- againsrfinaneidtransactionielatedrhereto containemi
tion ancaimkiles for theideiiverandthe objeaive oa resolutioa66(IM), &dl noiapplyto ioodstufnotifieto
globaibanon chemid weapns: the SeniriCouncaCommitteeestablisha!by resdutiun 661
(lm) mceming the situatibtween Iraqand Kuwaitor.
withtheappmal of thaCornmitteeundertbesimplifiecland
accelerate"no&jectionpro¢edure o materiaand supplies
foressentialdiau ne& asidentifiedin the reportthe
15.+tr the Seeretaiy-&nemi to reportto the Seeretary-GeaeddatedU3March 1991:a ~d inany fuder
Cwncil onthestq takentofscil'kthereturnofal1Kuwaiti nndmgsofhumanitarian ad by the Comminee;
prnpertyseid byIraq i,dudmga listof aay p~opertythar
Kuwaitdaims ha~ na ben retumedor wbkh basoot been 21.lAd+s torevietheprwisionsofparagraph20every
retumedintact: sixty dayinthe lightofthe policies and practicesof the
Gavement of Iraq, indudingtheimplementathn of ail
relevantredutioasoftheChm& forthepurposeofdeter-
rnininwbetbertoFeduΠorlifthe prohibitionsrefertod
themm
16, thatIrq, withoutprejuditortsebtsand
obligationa&q prior tu2 August 1990,whieh WU be 22 Decida essthatupa theapprwalby theCoud of
addm throughthe normal rnechanismsk Iiablder thepFOgramme ded foriupqph 19and upooCMid
intema!iod Iaw for aay dkea los damage -mdudiag agreementthaîIraqhascompletedallduns contemplatedm
ewironmentaidamage aacithedepletbuofnaturd SO~ - pamppbs 8 to 13,the prohibitioagaiaa the&port of
orinjuiytfore& Gorermneny natjiondand wons oommoditieasndprode originatmginIraqad the probib
asa wlt of itsdawfulhvasionad maptiai ofKiiwait; itionsagaha hancia-ions relatedtheremcootainedin I
reawiluth661(1990)&dl have nofurher forceoreffea;
17.Lhdes thatalIïaqisatemenumade siti eAugiret
1990 ~pudiarbg itsfore@ deh are null and vaid,and 23.Deeid esthu thatpdhg adim bythe CouncJ
demandsthat Iraq adbersxupdoudy to alofitobiigatiom der paragrapb the Cmmd Cornmittee estab
mc+2ming =Memg aad Epymmt of itfore@ de.& bhd by dutIaa 661 (1890o <mŒming the situation
berweerhq d Kuwaithallb ernpwxd toappm, *en
18.Lkih ah tome ahmd topiryoanpeasatiofor rquùed to atzam adquatefinanc riesourcoesthepariof
dhthat~within~ph 16dtoestabl'ishacanmis- lraqtoamy outthea&ities der paappb 20exceptions
sicmth* winadrninnterhefund; tothc pdibitioa agaiastthe importof oommoditiesand
produ& OriginatmngIraq;
19.DirecttbcSecretaxy-Cie tnodmlop and presait
totheCouncilforde&h, nolatertbm tbirdgys foflawing 24.DaadcJ th&,inadmΠPvitresolutia661(lm)
theadoptionof thep-P mlutim. secammendath for andsubqwnt related ~ ~ 0 1 ~ ad untiit takea further
thePuml to k estgbkhed inaeoordaa eithparapph 18 deckba. aiState&dl oontmue topmnt thesaleorsuppiy
and foa pFogrammetamiplunentthed h iDparappbs toIraqor,thepirimdon orfaditation such or supply,
by &eirnatiaaslsohm theirterritororsushgtheirdag
16to 18.mdudiugthe f-g: adminiPtratinftheRind,
mecbamismsfor dctemming the appmpriatelevelof ïq's -1s orairma& of:
contnitiw rothe W. kd w apemtage ofthevalueof
itexportsofpetdermid produ& nottocm& (a)Am and relatd mat&d of dl typesspecifidiy
a figuretobe mggestedtotheCormEilby the Secretary- mdudi thesale or transferttimughothreans ofaiCorn
Generai,takiainto th requirementoftheme of ofamventionadlitq equipmeat,indudmgforparamdirsry
hq, Lraq' ssrymentcapaeitasa&d m oonjrmdimiwith force s, sparepartasadmmpoaents and tbeirmeans of
themiemationalhawd ~#~ takingintomideratiw productioforwichquiperit;
extemaldebt serviceand theneeds ofthe Iraq-,
ammpaents foremrïng thatpaymentaremadeto theFund; (6)itemsspxi6sd and dehd inparapphs 8and 12
thep- bywhii fundsa k alloriatedanddaimspaid: na 0th- md above;
appropriatprodures forevaluatinlgeas, lisîmgclaaad
venfyiatheirvafidiand rwrolvidigputeddaimpm rem (c)TechnologyunderliŒnsingorothertransferarrange-
ofIraq'liabia lgtpecifiiupppb 16ad thecamposi- mats usedintheproductiou, tiiizaorostockpiiiofitems
tionoftheÇwnmisPion designateabinie:
spbnsoi dnpmgraphs(a) 4 Cb); (4 Personne or materials for training or technical
support servi-relatintothedrsigndeveliopment. anufac-
tureux, maintenanceorsupportofitemsspecifiedinpara- 32 RequiresIraqto mforrnthe #uncil that itwiUnot
graphç(a)and(b); ewnmitorsupportany ad ofintemaiionaltemkrn or allow
anyorgankationdirectectowardsu>mmjsnon ofsu~h a& to
25.CA upn alStatesandinternationlrganizations operatewithiits temtorand tomdem unequiwxdy and
to actrictinamordance withparagrap24,aotwithstanding repounΠal1am. meth& and pwtices OPtemrism:
theexistenceofanycontzactagreement.licencesoraaother
arrangernene
26.Reguesrr thekretary-General.indtation with
appropriateGavemnients,rodevelopwithinsutdafi forthe 33, h%ms that,uponofkif notifmtimby hq iothe
appiwal oftheCouncil.guidelineto facilitful lnterna- Secretary-Generald totheSecuFityounciloitsaoceptanw
timd implementationof paragmphs24,25 and 27, andto oftheah pdi a forniacease-fyeelTecii kmeen
makethem avaifabltodl Stateand toestaHi&a procedure ïraq andKuwaitandthe Member Statemperating with
forupdaringth- gridelinesperiodically: Kuwaitin accordancwith resolut 678n(1Wû);
27. CuiLrupn dlStatetomabtainsu&nalimaicontrois 34.DBcide so remah seized othe matterand totake
andpdures andto tak euchotheïadims dent with su& furthestepsasmay bemquiredfortheimpfementation
theguidelinestobeestablishetheCouacilunderparagraph ofthepriisentresolurioaantoseaire peacand seatritm
26asmay beneeessarytoemre mpli;uiee withthe rems of the regha
paragraph24.and4s upon internationlrganizatioo take A- m die WISmcriinlyII
allappropriaseps toassiintensuringmicfullc-ximpliaaoe; w&?¶tuI(~)*Z&~
tu. Y-).
28. Agreesto rwiew ideebionsinparagraphs22to 25,
-excepfortheitemsspcifiedanddehed inpampphs 8and
12on a regularbas&andinanycaseonehmhd anci twenty
dayslollowiathe adoptioof theprisent resciIuttaking
mtoamnt Iraq's wmpliancewith theremfution9ndgenerd
progresstowardthecuntmIof armamenu intheregka: At its =rd meeting,on 9 April1W1. the Cwacil
decidedto invittheremsentativesofkaa and Kuuraittu
participat, ithoutvoce,tbedisnrsPimof;he iteentitied
29. DBcides(hatal1Sutashdud'ingIraq,WL take the rimo<ionbe- Inl .od of -
nmary measurwto ensure tbat no clah hall lie athe tary-Generalntheimplementatiwofparagrapb5ofSecuriy
instancof theGwemment ofILaqo , rofanypersonorixdy &und mlutioo 687(1991) (%!XS4 andAdd.l3)".'
inIraq,orofanypersonclaimingzhrougorforthebenefitof
aaysuch personorbdy, incwnedion witb aay owtrad or
othetransactiowhereitperformanc e as&&eû byrem
ofthemeasunstakenby theCorncil inresolut661(159
andre1ate.resolutiuns
. 30. &cida tha. in furtheranceofitsommhent to
facilittherepatriationofaKuwait indthlrd-Stanation-
alsIraqshallextendslneceaaryeog>eraîioto ,~eInterna-
tionaCmmittee of the RedCross byprwidingli ofsueh
persans,acilitahg the oftheInternationl mmittee
toal1su&pesas wherwe locateûorderainedandfacilitatmg
thesearchby the hitemalionCornmitteeforth- Kuwaiti
andthirdStatenaticmalailuaacwmted for,
31,In* theInternationl ornmittof theRed Crass
tokcep theSecretivy-Genemlapp- asappropriateofaii
aamtiesundenakeninconneetionwjtbfacilitattherepatri-
ath orretumof alKuwaitiandthirdStatenatimalsortheir
=mainspresentinIraqonor aAer2 kugust1990: Exhibit 39
Note by the President of the Security Council
(UnitedNations Document ~/23500; 31 January 1992) Distr.
GENEF=L
ORIGINAL: ENGLIÇH
NW BY THE PRPSlDm OF THE SEeriElITYÇOüNCIL
At theconclusion of the 3046th meeting of the Senrcity Council, held at
the Levelof Heads of State and Goverrimenton 31 January 1992 in connection
with the itementitled-The responsibilit of the Secutitymeil Ln the
maintenance of internationa leace and securitya,the President of the
Security council made the follçiwinqstatement on behalfof the membersof
the Coucil.
.The membessof the SecutityCouncilhave authorized me eo make the
follonhq statementon theirùehalf,
"The SecurityCuuncil met at the Headquarters of the United Nations
fnNew York on 31 January1992, for the first the at the Level of.Heads,
of State and Gwernment. The members of the Couneilconsidered, vithin
theframewrk of their coaÿnitmentto the United Nations Charter, 'The
responsibilito yf the securftyCouncilin the maintenance of
internation aeace and security*, &/
l/ The meetinq was chaired by the Prim Ministerof the United ~ingdom of
~reat- ri tainand Ncrrthern Irelandas the President of the Security ~mmcil foc
January. Statements were made by Hh gxcellencyPr. Fraru Vranitzky, Feâeral
Chancellor of Austria, His Excelltncy Rr. YiLfried Martens, Prime ninister of
Belgfum, His DcelTency Dr. Carlos Alberta Wahnon de Carvalho veiga, . .
Primeninister of Cape Verde, His mellency Mr. Li Penq,Premierof the State
Councilof China, Hfs exeellencyDr. BodriqoBorja-Cevalïos, çonstitutlonal
Pcesidene of -dot, H3s ExeelleneyMr. François Mitterrand, Presidenr of
France, His üxcellcncy Dr. ûkza Jeszenszky,minister for ForeiqnAffafrsand.
Personal Emissary of the Prkne minister of Hunqary, His Excellency
.. .
m. P. V. Narashha ûao, Prime PIbbti?r of India, His Rxceliency ..
W. Kiichi miyazava,PrimeMister of Japan, Hls Ha jesty Hassan 11, ~inq of';.
iuioroccoHLs Excellency Hr, BorisN. YeLtsin, Presfdentof theElussian --
Federation, His Excellencythe Ut, Hm. John Major RF, PrimeHlnister of the
United Kinqdom of Great Britain and NorthernIreland,His Excellency
W. Ceorge Bush, Presidenr of the Unitedstares of America, His Excellency
Dr.Carlos~ndrés ~érez, President of Venezuela and His Rxcetlency
Dr. NathanShamuyarira, nlnisterof Foreign Affairs and PersonalBniçsaryof
the Fresident of Zimbabwe, as well as by the Secretary-General His mcellenq
Jr. BoutrosBoutros-Ghali..S/23500
enqlbh
Page 2
"Rie &ers of the SecurityCauncilconsfder that their meetinq fs
a timely recognition of the fact that these are new favourable
internationac irçirmstanccs under wtiich the SecorityÇouncllhm kgun ro
fulfil more e€Eectfve'ly its prfmary responsibil i for the maintenance of
international peaceand secrrrity,
*Thb ateetinq takesplace at a the of mcmentous chanqe, The endinq
of theCeld Uar hss raiseci hopes for a safer, more equitableand more
humaneworld. Rapid progress has been made, .in many regions of the
r~orld, tonards~~ray and resporrsfveeorms of goverment, as well as
towards achievinq the Rtsposes set out Fn the Charter- The completion of
the dl&6tling of apartheid Ln South africa wwld constitute a major
contribution to thest mes and positivetrends, IncLudfnq to the
encouragemen of respect for human rightsand fizndamental freedoms.
*Lat year, Ynder the authoriey of theUnitedNations,the
internationa çl ity succeedeâ Ln enablkng Kuwaft to reqainits
sovereiqnty and territoria ilnteqrfty,uhich it had Lost as a resulr of
xraqi aqqresslon. The resolution sdoptedby the SecurityCouncil rmin
essentbl to the restoraeioo nfpeace and srability Ln the region and' -
must be Eullybplemented. kt the sam~r th themembets of the Council
are cumctened .bythe humanitaria nltuatim of the innocentcivilian
populatim of Iraq. .-*
- .5 ..
*Theraembers of the Cuuncfl support the Hiddle East peace proçess, r-
facilitated by the RussianFederationand the United States,and bpe
tbt it will be brcruqhrto a successEu1 conclusion on the basfs of
mcil resolutiwr s42 (1967) and 338 (1973).
"Riey welcome the role the ünited Nationshas been able to play
underthe Charter in prqress towardssettlhg Zonq-standing regional
dfsputes, and dl1 wrk for Êurtherproqrcss towards their resolution.
Tfiey applaud thevaluablecontribution befng made by United Nations
peace-keepinq forces rww operathg fn Asia, Africa, Utin America and
gurope.
"The memhrs of the Couticilnote that UnitedNations peace-kcephq
tasks have kreased and broadenedconsiderably in recentyears.
glection mitorlnq, hman riqhts verification and the repatriation of
refuqees have in the settlement of saue regtanal conflicts, at the -
request or rfth the agreement of the partiesconcerned, bcenIntegral --
parts of theSecurity Council's effort to mafitain international peace
and security. They welcane these developments-
"The membersof the Coucl1 also recoqnize thatchange, hawever
welcame, Aas brouqht neu risks for stabklity and security. Sane of the
mst acute problems resultfrm changes to Çtate structures. The members
of the Council vil1 encourageal1 efforts tu heLp achieve peace,
stability and couparation durinq these chanqes.S/23500
mlqllsh
Paqe 4
Çecretary-Ceneram liqht drawon lcsscns learned in recent United Nations
peace-keeplnq missions to recumend ways of making mase effective
Çecretariat planning and operations. He could also consider hm qreater
use mightbe made of his good offices, and o€ his other funetfonsder
the UnitedMationsCharter.
"Disarmament, arms control and wapons of mass destructiort
"The members of the Council,while fully conscioris of the
responsibilftie sf other orgarisof the United NatiUm Ln the fieldsof
disasmament, arms conrroP and non-proLfferation teaffina the crucial
contributtonwhich progress fn ehese areas cm make to the maintenance of
international peaca end seciirity. They expresstheir carrrraitmento take
concretesteps to enhance the effectivenes sP the UnitedNations b
these areas.
"Themembers of the Council undetlinethe need for al1 Henber States
to fulffl theirobligationsin relation to am wntrol and disarmament;
to preventthe pcoliferatim in al1 its aspects of al1 weapanJ of mass
destrricticrnto avoid excessive and destabfllring accumulation asnd
ttansfersaf am: and to resolve peacefully in accordance with the
Charterany problems concernbq thcse mètters threatenfnq or disrupthg
the maintenanc oef reqional and globalstability, They em~hasfzc th.
importanceof the earlyratificatioa nnd hplementatirJn by the States
concernedof all Internathl and reqional arms controtarrangements,
especiallythe STAFT and CFE Treatfes.
"TheproLiferaelon of al1 weapons of mass destruction censtitute s
threat tainternattanal mace anü security. Rie menrbes sf the Coincil
commit ehemselves towrkhq toprwent the spread of technoloqy relateû
to the reseatchfor or production of such weapons and to take appropriate
action to that end.
"On nucleaïiroliferatfon, they note the inportance of the decfslm~
of many auntries to adhere ta the Han-FreliferatimTreatyand emphasfie
the hteqral role Ln the hplementation of that Treaty of fully eEfective
IAeAsafegwrds, as tael1'asthe importance of effective export controls.
The membersof the Cauncflwill take appropriatemeasures in the case of
any violations riatified tothem by the m.
*On chemicalweapons,they supportthe efforts of the Çeneva
by the
mnferenee u-ith aview toteachinq agreement un the conclusion,
end of 1992, of a universai convention, including a verfffcatfo negime,
to prohibitchemfcal weapons.
"On conventional amaments, tky note the General~ssembly's vote in
favour of a WnftedNations reqister of arms tramfers as a first Step,
and in thfsçonnectionrecognize the importanceof al1 States providinq
al1 the informatfun called for in the OeneralAssembly'sresolutfon. SI23500
Enq1ish
Page 5
-Inconclusion, the ders of the SecuriryCuuncll affim thefr
detemination to build on the initiative of theFr meetingln order ro
secure positive advances In promotinq internationa leace and security.
They aqree that theUnitedMattons Secretary-Generah las a crucial role
to play, The membess of the Cwnicil express their deep appreciation co
the outqohq Secretary-General H,i3EXcelIeney
Rr. Javiec Pérez de Cuéllar,for his outstandingcontributicin to the kiork
of theUnited Nations, ~ULminatfng in the siqnature of the El Salvador
peace agreement- They ivelcanethe new Secretary-GeneralH ,b Exce1lency
~r. Boutres Bwitros-Ghali, and notewith satisfactio nis intention to
strenqthen and inpcwe the fmctionhq of the UnitedNations, They
pLedgetheir full support to hk, and underraketo workclosely with him
andhis staff in EulfiLmen of thefr shared objectives, including a more
efficiena tnd effectiveUnited Nations systeat,
*Themembers oE the Couneilaqree that the mrld nav has the best
chanceof achfevhq kntetnationa leace and security sincc the foundation
of theUnitedNations. They dertake ta uork Lnclose cocrperation ulth
otherünited NationsHemkr States h thefr awn efforts to achieverhb,
as wellas to addressurgerttly al1 the crtherprublems, in particular
chose of ecuucmicand socialdevelopment, rcquirinq thecollective
respme O€ the internationa mlity- Riey recogfilze that peace and
prwperity are indivisible artdtbt lastbg peacearidstabilktyreguire
effective ineernatimal oooperation for the eradicatim of pciverty and
the pr~(~~tionof a becterLffefor al1 im larqerfretdam,' Exhibit 40
Statement by the President of the Security Council
(UnitedNations Document ~/~~~~/1994/40; 29 July 1994)UNITED
NATIONS
Security Council
e
S/PRST/1994/4Q
29 July 1994
ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
STATEMENT BY THE PRESIDENTOF TEE SECURITY COUNCIL
After consultations of the Council held an 29 July 1994, the Pseaident of
the Security Couneil made the following statement to the media on behalf of the
Couneil :
"The membere of the Security Ceuncil recall the statement issued on
the occasion of the Security Council Summit of 31 January 1992 (s/23500),
éxpressing deep consern over acts of international terrorism, and
emphaeizing the need for the internationaleommunity to deal effeetively
with al1 euch acts.
"The menibers of the Security Council etrongly condemn the terrorist
attack which took place in Buenos Aires, Argentina on 18 July 1994, which
sesulted In great los8 of human life.
"The membera of the Security Council express their sympathy and
condolences to the victims and their familiesand to the people and
Goverment of Argentina, who have suffered the consequeneee of this
terrorlet aet.
"The members of the Security Couneil aleo stsongly condemn the
terrorist attaeka in London on 26 and 27 July 1994, and expsesa their
sympathy to the victims and their families, and to the people and
Cevernment of the United Ringdom.
"The members of the Security Council demand an immediate end to al1
eueh terrorist attacks. They stress the need to stcengthen international
caoperation in order to take full and effective measures to prevent, combat
and eliminate al1 foms of tesroriem, which affect the international
comunity as a whole."
94-31023 (E) 290794 Declaration on Principles of International Law Concerning
Friendly Relations and Co-operation Among States in Accordance
with the CharteUnited Nations General Assembly,tion 2625 (XXV),
1883rd Plenary Meeting, 24 October 1970RESOLUTIONS
adopted by theGeneral Assembly
during its
TWENTY-rn SESSION
GENERAASSEMBfY
OFHCIALRECORDS:WENTY-HFTHSESSION
SUPPLEMENTo28 (A/8028)
UMTED NATIONS
New York19112625 (XXV). Dmhmtioa on Rinuples of hteii Deeply cunvinntha he &@on d theDdara-
naiionalLaw boncedq FiIendlyRtlado~ tim on PriacipleofZn~IiOnal Law OW-g
and co.O~tion amoq Sm in FriendlyRelatioand -ration ammg Statein
anee withthtCharbe rf&e Uni& Nrtlom aamcbwe with theCharteof tbeUnitdlNationon
the dm ofth tweaty-Mthannivtrsaryothe
TheGmrrvJ A=m$ly, UnitedNationsnroalc01lmptcto thes~gthenillg
RtwIü~g &ati01~91815 (XM) d 18 Dstm- velopmentofhbmatidhtdhw andof relationsamwg
ber1962,1966 (XVIII) o16 Dsoembe 1963,2103 hm, inpromo* th*mk d lm amangnationsand
(XX) of20 Dccmk 1965,2181 (XXI) d 12 particularyheunmerd appIhth--.af the principiu
DtcEmber1966,2327 (XXii)d 13Dactmba 1967, emhdiedinth Chuter1
2463 (Xxm) of 20 bccmber 1968 and 2553 oftbewidedisseminatim
(XXIV) of 8 D##nk 1969,inwhkb It the oftbcttxtoftbt~
imvcc ofthepmpwive deybpmtIu and
catiooftheprinciphofie- lawcon-g 1. Appmws thelkdrmtiaa.on~1cs ofInter-
kiedly dationsana-atiw amoagStata, nitionaIr omsmingPrieam RaLhm aud Ce )
Havingmddmed thtqmc of the speeiam- of theUorttNationstbctcxofwhkbishannexcdto
mitteoriPrinciples of Intemationaconmming thp-t rtsdum
Fndy Relatim and Co-operatioamon Statw,'
rhichmat inOsnevafrom31 Mar& to 1day 1970, 2. Expream b appreddon înthe SpeciCom-
Emphbhg the parmount Mporfanceof tha FrieodiREiatbmad Cwpratirn amwgrStareforg
Chart otrtheUnikdNationsforthemain- of itnworkdting iutbtelabotatinftlieeciaratim;
mttrnatioaalpcactand~tyandforthcd~~
mat of kkdy relationsanvtiw ammg 3. Reeommend hatdleffortsbtmadesothatthe
Statw, t Declaratôieamt8gcnm hom.
1O~ialRem& ofthe GcnerAambb, Twew-%th
S w SupplcmcNo.18 (AfWl8). -'Ik.Snly.mISouiam
WntEmporatg inîmmikd hw,ad îhatitadedive rppb-
tionY ofparrmwnt imw fortheprwiotiolofhimm
rrlatW~tr~nmg~baŒdans#pPdiortbcyrjaEipkd
e w=litY,
Convinnd in thrtiny rtmnpt rimsd it.the
partial~touldhmptbnoftht~tional~ty~dta~i~
iilioetof a Stakor canby or ititspolitidindtph
iiinmnpatfblarit tbprps~ and-plu of the Chuter,
ConrirZmngth pmviriam of the Charteraaa Me and
Thr GcrrcrAdb, tahg intoe t h de of rrknnt rewlutiona sdopDcd
Rcufinningintht tnms ofthe Qmter of theUnW Na- by the ~ampetcnorgm ofthe Uaitod Nations dahg to
tionsrhatthemahm of inkmajimd p## andd thematmtof the-
ana th developat of*diy relarha sod e Q n Coddedw? thitik - devdapmnt and dm-
kmccn natioruareamongtht - of the lionofthefotldng -la:
UmtcdNatiom,
Rccailinthatthe psapIe3oftht Udtd Niti~m art da (a)'IheprincipIetbatStatgib.Urrhinintbeirintcrrra-
termintdtopracdp coleranccandIive mer inpe= with tefiüonrhtcgrityarpoW~offoreeagninsttofany Sw, ar
cmean&assood~bours, in any othermannrr iireomisern wîthe purposesofth
BcMng in mind the ' of main- rnd UnitedMaths,
mmiq inmnatid=d igm
spuaiityjusb arid forfiindammai humarrightand (b) The bt $tataihal de thUr h~rnatimai
of dtvcioping-y rdmm auy nstionWye gooetmdiserPityrnb~mmt~um&nmantserLat~wal
of tùeir plitic-E, md d thehh
of the^dtv~l~~ Cc)Thsdutynotto~mcinmatters~thedonieaie
Bcm'ng in mud aLotbt wnnt imporÉanceof the ~etiwi of my *, in-nbnm with the -,
Chprttr~fthtUtCdNatianainhpmmtmoftkïalc
-oflaw am- malbm,
Co~ringthatthofaithful~oftb~~of
iutedonal iaw alendlydntha aud
tion mong Statcs andthe mat ip goodfaith ofth
obiigatioesa~sumrdby~in'~~theChaner,
iaoitbgreatedimpwtrrrrs~tbomgin~of~~ (8) The prinapkthrtStatesahdifulf nlgoodWtb
tianaipeaceand and forïb impiem~ltath of the obli&m~bythemibsEcotdarict~~~,
othepupecs oftheUnituiNatEons, io sstoawwc tk&rmoic &setiv rpplidn withintbein-
Noringthattée poiitidsain& andioe$lchangm mnationalmunity, wdd - the rdidion of tht
gnd scicntiûc wbiehhave tabn pk inthe wm1d purpolioftheUnitedNw
rincethe adoptioofh Charte grivcilamscd Having conadmd& phidpies ofintematid IBW rti8t-
tot6es erincipland totheead forth& ir morOeEtiw hg towdly relatid onsCmphon mllg States,
~Wonintbeoondtietaf~whemer~~n,
Wing theab- -pic thataidespaeeW,ud-
ingthc Moonandotlm dntialbodies, h uotsubject tom- The principthorStatu #hairefrainJIzkirintc~'onal
tiod appropriatibydaim of -, bJ I of UBC rclariontftoik thraior WC of foreagaim theter-
or -tien, or by any othe tearismd mindful of the rithl int- orpofW in$cpcndenceof - Smr,
tathebpwationdofetab-bdug othcrn-teb Unitptwisiwa or iany oihm m~nct hMtrit# with thepwpow of
amifarlinspirod. iheUnitedNdom
oftheobliga- Ewy StatEbas the dnty tDrchh in ihlÎllWQa~
tion notodinternedin tha&b of aayorher StaSfsan mhti~ns hm the th& m tm of fou# theO-
essentialwnditiontowmm thanaibm lîvc togcihu ptae~ ritmiaLntegriorpolirid independemeof any - Qr
withone anothu sincthe ofany fa- of imem- in any0th- manm hcan&cnt witb the of th^
tionnotoniy violatm tspiriandlettuof the Chartebnî Unitui NationSuch atate atape of faroeonstittracs
aIe eadstrthe crcatioofdmtiuns whichthrraticnterna- viaMon of intemationallarndtbeCharterofthe Uaitcd
_tionaptaftand=luîv, Natiem andaealelmr be rmploycd8sa meamof
Remtlingthtdu@ ofStatta î0 IChhb -0nal înbmationaissue%
relatiofrom military,itieat#rdc orany 0th form A warof @on dîntw a crime againthe
ofcocrcion aimedam thepolitid indepcndcnoor ta- fm which tbm b mpmsibiiity Pnderinternatid Law.
ritorialinte&ofany Sm. In accwdanecwith theprtrposcand principlof &
Consideringit thatal1Statcshaü sefrsin tl& United Nation%Statw have the duty to rchb hm
btemtional mlationsbwilhs thFeaor use offarce agah~t propagand or wm ofMW.
theterritorialinttorypolitidMdsnot of ariSU, EveryStatebssth du@ to mhin hum the thremor
orbanyothcrmanncrincomxhntwithtbe~oftht pseofforceto violatthtcaing sa on al boundarit3
UnitedNations. ofanothw Stator rna means of dving internationaldis-
Contidetinit equallewm~tiattatdi StatesW ~tttle pues. indudingterrito&quiri andproblemswnŒrning
thtir intedod disputaby mful meansinacamhm hntiem ofStatca.
witbth+Charter, Evcry Sut+Iürewk ha th duty to refraihnm the
Rmfirming, m accordanawith thCharter,thebasicim- thma! or useof fwcc t~violate international hof
portgn~of sovereigequaütyandirIr&ng that the pwpsts dtmar&oo, michasarmisti~h, estabiishd borpur-
oftheUnited Nationscanbcimpicm~tedonlyifStattenjoy suant tan intemtional agfŒmento wbieh itisapar&
soverei gnuaiitandcomply fuliywih thrrcqukunentsof or*ch it iotherwi boundto respecHotbinain the
thi srincipin their international relations, foregohgshallk #rmd m preiudicinthcpositiomof
Convimd that the sobjcction of pmplea toalkn subjaga-hepartics c~md withregardtothe statuand efïecta
tioadomiaationand exploitationconstiaumajorobstacle of such linesnder th& spaeiarégimesor as affecting
tothe pmtion of immationai peace andStMity, thcrtcmporary clmxdcr.
Convinccd thatheprinciplofequd rights ami geIf&im- Statehave a dutytore6rai hm actsof reprisalin-
mination af-les uimtimm a wcaot maibution to vol* thenseofforce.-y
.: EïrtryStathsasthedoty tomhb kfromany fam%le
tien ofthuphuple ofeqdltri&& andtaclfdckrmhtian-
of thtir rigto aelf&!amh&on and kecdom and in- The principconccrning tduty not intervcm wcrs
- wiihinthedomutic juridictiofany Smi, in accord-
Evay SU has the duty trefrain bm organiPngor amc wilhrhLCher
e=amg@ Ihc or@nhtion ofimgular fom or armed No Stateor groupof StatehaJthcright tointena,
ban& includi-y forhcmioa imo tbterritory dkdy orindirertlforarireasowhateverinfhcinternai
0f~thcrState. - or extemadain ofWIY Statt-enth, amed
Evcry !%k hasthe dutyto rehh frm ..nizio& intuventioad athef formaointufmna w iattempted
iartisatiassistior participatingacu of unl nnfe thteab against the mty of theSlak or gsaieJita
ur temrrialacinder %te oraquidg inorgankd plirieal, cuinoand dtrrraeiements,artinvisiatofn
~tiw.withinitimIitory~~thse4mmi9im internationallaw.
of&aas,whcnthtaetsatointbeprgmigara- No Stak mav use or -p theose ofemwmic,
pphMr~a~orussoffa~# politIca1or aotbe rypsof mensmm te cwry auok
Thu~toryoIaState~notbstbtabjsetof~ Sîateinordtrb obSaihnm itthe mihmkamn ofthe
oceripa.thdtioghhpsecffDtesin~tim cxrrcisof its *ta and Ki actrrehm it
of thsprovigm of the Charter. Ttmitorpof a Stats advantaguofany kindAlrq noStatcahaüaganUe, mist,
&diWktbeobjeFt~l~onbyanotnaStatbdt- armcdetiw aMie ozawardstheviokntiO-w terrofîst or
inghmthethrtatorirssoffora.Notari~~om thed&Ûw ofaaothrr m intcrfe rneÛviIee in
d~~tbtbr#tlxa#dforcashallbei~~~&cd anathcrstaoc.
padng:l,N-*biPpmthbforegoing&ailbo~m Tbc = of foreeto d&m poph oi tticimrtid
.. identity umsm i oiohfïoaoftheiridicnable righb
mentpnorto'ths~~doaüdtladierint#oi-matbd a- and ofthepwla of -ution.
8iOdtaw;ot
AgQtatesshaïfprrrarrsh~mhoe~ausfortha -
eatly=Men d unch effeaivintaPatio w nall and the tn&mmea d a peeEaalxi&ty.
~0idopl~meaatrrs.toiedtiee~maI
-iod-arcnsbn~~manp~ The6- ofSkia focwme wfihoneawrlta in
M&ksahan.comptgingdEPithwi&theirobligntrons -de with thCher
~tkia~~~aÿdrrilwof~ Stancshapstbs &y to eooperattwith orwamder,
~I*~%ith~~thsmaiÜtenaafo~f~d irrwp#tivsofths~inthtirpoliticpl,ownomied
~d~tr,mdsballcdm~tomnLe~U~ sonal~intboPuiorrinp~of~tioMliieia-
N~#erPitgsystcm~mltfisQitncr~*. tions,in~îomrintPInhtmukd~nndsecirritg
andto~irUaMtioPol~~tyand~
t2ie~wrlirriod~d~onal~
tioahfmmd' " - 'ûmbrsedm~dinm~
To rhb d:
ths~~~.~dûakkIdrmnnaac t&ir- rrhioa in
~Wiihtb~d~eqriaIityd
mm--,
(dl Sm Membsn altb UoibbdN- bave th &y
totnbjnimtdiepurtsietknin~rafhnwitùtb
UnitedN~m m roeordipewih rbè-rtleoanp w
of the Chutsr.
~puaieriPmhama!ad~.idluatba
~.~*hiop&mahirhmayAgmat~to
tbo~~roMtodanWtb~ofime
~peso~d~,dshaltiet.in~with
tbs, ad d th UnitedNd-
- ~onil~shanbeatttl~aatbebre~d&
~cqoaütgofStaDosdin~wtththo
dnm-frsslywŒdbbyStiPtilwabm3t~,ar~
rcgrrdto~~~~bwhichtbsy~p4ia
ihillwibs~u~bwirh~~.124 ..- Gad *b-mmfatr-mb u
. .
ad ielf- ob~fnuzdamtfitbthe Th mp& ChoiSma &U W F pod Id th
~~dtbsChuDer,rnd~oimdrr~totbe 0b~ntdhrh.cmin~~~rk
WnitedNathafntanyhgoiittbo~iuea~ Chr
b3itbptheCairter~tlmf-oftbe . B~Strtehitbt~tofPlfniuDDod~the
Mmorder: obliortiarrHmraedbytin~rithbChIo
(a)To~~ccliaktrti~eoaperitBonrmao~ 'of tbeww N-
-rad Emyst.tshuQD~tofOlfllinpd~itiobli-
(blTo~im.rAedt~ad~hrïînpdire ~~~~~rreoOnimd~b~~
raOwItotbsfdy~~dtk~ooP 0f-k~.
=mk ~v~y&&3l8aikdrrtytO~h~w?hb&
~beulzip~&~~af~~~& ---anil---tbegeÿ.
&~~~~arufimh.l~- ~~pMEIpJ*Idhgf~~b~-
bmrranrighg.adh~totbs~.
UdtcdhtimmWtbs~.@tbeUnitcdNafium,
Evap~barttsedrrtytopmmott~~8d tb,- -*-*-
ret-ia-nItbdobieffYi#d 5
tbCaPrier. FART.
EmyStnthshdumbtcfriinfromawhi
Whn whkh dqmha psop2# refmed toiboPe k the
~mdfreedwnIdl~~Inthar of t&Û &bt toiek
~~~aad~to,iaeh~~~in
~WittlIha~d~ltaaf~~.
mmnbcrarbpaü,~Gr&pu~tbe~in-
tepitorpoli- dty Eb rnd-t Staka
cwd~~~inwm.iopcwi&tke~kof
eqd riehtsaddfb afpooploigsmbcd
whak peopb be-~t~~totheterrrtowdmut distiPctioa
rstoraŒ,uudoroolorn.
(a)Stat#nrtjmididiyoqoal;
(d)Tbterntorialinte&&yindpdifhI~d
the State are inYidablc; Exhibit 42
Aerial Hijacking or Interference with Civil Air Travel,
Resolution 2645 (XXV),United Nations GeneralAssembly,
1914th Plenary Meeting, 25 November 1970RESOLUTIONS
adopted by theGeneral Assembly
during ite
TWENTY-FIFIX IESSION
GENERAASSEMBLY
OFFICIALRECOR:WENTY-RFTHSESSION
SUPPLEMENTo.28 (A/8028)
UNITFD NATIONS
New York, 19712645 (m). A& hi@* or hterferenŒ
rvithrivilairiravel
The Gemmi Assembb,
Rmgiriting thainternationuviI aviationavital
tink the promotionandpteservatiooffriendlyre-
lationsamong Statesand thatitsde and ordetly
functioningia theinter efst peopIes,
GraveS mrurernedover actsofaerialhija~kinor
aber wronpfuilnterferenwith civiairtravel,
~e~omiz5a~ that mchsetsjeopardizthelivesand
violationof tbeirhumanrigbts,w and constituta
Aware thathternationalciviaviationcan dy
hdiw properlyinconditionguaranteeinthesafety
ofairIravel,tionsathedue exercisof theMm
Endorring thesolemn declarati ofnthe exira-
dary sessioof tbeAssembIyof theInternational
CivilAviatioOqanhtion hdd atMontrealkom 16
to30 June1970,
Bemirrgin mind6teneraAssemblymolution 2551
(Xxrv) of 12-ber 1969and SecurityCouncil
~esolutio286 (1970) of9 Septanber1970 adopted
by carrsensat the1552ndmeetingd theCamcil,
1. Condmfnr, without exceptionfiamevers di
ofaeri ajackmgorotherinterfe~ncewithcivil
airûavd, wkther originaInationaor internationd,
throug the threa truseof fore, and allactsof
violencewbh may be directedagainsipasse-,
crew and aim& engw in,md air navigation
fdties and acmmuticai communicationsused by,
civilaitransport;
2. Cab won Statetotakeanappropriate easufes
ta deterpment or mppms such actswi& tberr
jmkdiction,at evey stagof theexecutiw ofthos
acts ,nd toprovidefurthe prosecutioandpuniçb-
ammemuate witb theerpgtavitofhthosecrimes,or,
withautpm)dice to therighancobligatioof States
underexistrnginternationailnstrumrelatito the
maiterforthe extraditiO£suchpmwç forthepur-
pose ofthtipusecutionand p-ent;
3. Decimes thatheexploitationof unlawsekm
ofaitffaftforthepurposeofrakinghostageisto~
condemncd;
urnmmtkd QvilAviationQrgankti- RCSU-
W)pic(-bg riiIWO),MuLionenAl7-1.mm .t.rd- 4. Dech fwth th& theunlawfuldeteritiof
passengerand crewintransitorothemiseengageain
civiairtraveisto becondemnedas anok formof
mn@ interferencwithfiee andunintemiptedair
travel;
5. Urges Statesto thetemtorof whichahijacked
aircrafisdivettedto pravide fthecare andsafety
ofitspassengerand crewand to enablthtm to con-
tinuetheir jmey assmn aspracticabk,and to re-
hirnthe airmafand ib cargoto thepersansIafiy
entitretoposs~sion;
6. InviteStatesa rat@ or accedetotheConven-
tiononOffencesandCertainOther Am Committed
anBoardAimaft, signed at Tokyo oii14 September
1363,'*inconformitywith the Convention;
7. Requesrsconcertedactioon the partofStatwi,
towardssuppressindieactswhichjeopardizethe safe
and orderly devehpment of intemationaiCid air
-rt;
8. Cdls upon Statesto take joinand separate
actioninaccordancewiththeCharter, in cwperatim
AviationOrganizatiato enmu~thatnpassengers,mmit
and aircr angagedincivil aviationarenased as a
meansof extoïsinadvantageofany W;
9. Urges fulsupportforthe curenteffortof îhe
EnternationCliviAviationOrganhtiw twPards the
developmentand c~tdination, in accordanwîthits
cornpetence, effectivmeasuresin respecof inter-
ferencwithcivilairtravel;
IO. Cab upon Statetomake everypossibleefiort
to achieveasucmdd resuitat thediplornaticoril
ferencetoconvena etThe Hague inDeamber 1970
forthepu- ofthe do tiw of aconventionon the
nnlawful=inimn& sothaan ef~mivc-
ventionmaybe broughtinto forc etan earlydate.
19I4t hlcnürmeeting,
25 Novemb~ 1970.
flUnite~&m, Tm Sdm, VOL7W (196% Na 10106. Exhibit 43
Measuresto Elirninate InternationalTerrorism,
Resolution 49/60, United Nations General Assembly
84th PlenaryMeeting, 9 December 1994
(United Nations Document A/RES/49/60; 17 Febsuary 1995) General Assembly
Distr.
GEHERAL
Forty-ninth aesaion
Agenda item 142
RgSOLûTI~ AWPTED BP TAE GENERU ASSEM8LY
[on the report of the Sixth Witt- (A/49/743)]
49/60. Heasuresto elbinate international
terror isq
The Gerieral Aeaembly,
RecaLlinq ite reaolution 46/51 of 9 December 1991 and fte deciaion
48/411 of 9 hcember 1993,
Takina note of the report of the Seetetaxy-General, h/
Havina considem in depth the queationof meaeuree tu eliminate
internationalterroriem,
Convinced that the adoption of the declab-ation on meusures to eliminate
international terrori~mahould contribute to the enhancement of the etruggle
againat international terrarium,
1. Awrovee the Declaration on Meaaures to Elbinate International
Terroriam, the text of whieh fe annaxedto the preeent remlution;
2. Inviteethe~retsry-GeneraltofnformallStatea,theSecurity
Council, the InternationalCourt of Juetice and the relevant mpecialized
agencFee, organizations and organima of the adoption of the Declaration;
3. nrasi that every effott be made in order that the Declaration
bacme generally hum and Li observed and implementedin full#
4. Uraea Statse, in accordance with the proviaionsof the
DecZaration, to tah al1 appropriatemeasuree at the national and
internationallevele to efiminate terrorlgm~
i/ A/49/257 and Add.1-3.~/ReS/49/60
Page 2
S. Jnvite~ the Secretary-Generalto follow up cloeely the
implementation of the preeent resolution and the Declaration, and to eubmit to
the General Aaeembly st its fiftieth eeeeion a report thereon, relating, in
partieular, to the modalitiesof implementation of paragraph 10 of the
Declaration?
6. pecidea to include in the provisionalagenda of fts fiftieth
eeeaion the Atm entitled "Meaeuree to elbinate lnternatlonalterroriem",in
ordar to examine the report of the Seeretary-Generalrequeated in paragraph 5
above, wlthout prejudice to the annual Ur biennial coneidetationof the item,
ANHPiIC
peelaration on Heasueem to 'Bliminate InternationalTerrorFsm
The General kssemblv,
Cuided by the purpoees and principlee of the Charter of the United
Hat ions,
RecallFnq the Declarationon Principleaof International Law eoncerning
Prienrîly Relations and -ration among Statee in accordance with the Charter
Internationald Seeurity, aa/ tth8Dnefinition of Aggreesion,he-/ngtheoDeelatation on
the Enhancemant of the Effectivenesa of the PrincLple of Refrkining from the
Threat or Uae of Force in fntemational Relations, the VAenna Oeclaration
and Programmeof Action, adoptedby the World Conferenceon Human Rights, 5/
the International Covenant on Econmfc, Social and Cultural Rights and the
International -venant on Civil and PolftiealRights, a
peewly dieturbed by the ororld-wide peralmtenceof acta of international
terroriem in al1 ite fotms and manifeetationa, fneluding those in whieh States
are dfrectly or FndFreetly fnrolved,whieh endanger or take innocent livea,
have a deleterfouseffect on international relations and may jeopardizs the
eecurity of Statea,
éJ Re=* of the World Conference on Human Riahts. Vienna,
14-25 June 1993 (A/CUm+lf7/24 (Part I)), chap. III.
Z/ See reaolution 2200 A (xII~), annex. A/RES/49/60
Page 3
Deenlv coaeerned by the increase, in many regioneof the werrld,of acts
of terrorFem base on intolerance or extremiiim,
Ccrncerneù at the growing and dangerous links between terroriet groupe
and drug traffickera and their paramilitary ganga, whfeh have reeorted Co al1
typa of violence, thua endangeringthe con8titutlonal osder of Stntee and
violating basic hwman sights,
îknvineed of the deeirability for cloeer coordinationand ewperation
amng Statee in combatingcrimeeeloeely co~ected with terroriem, ineluding
nuclearraand other potentiallydeadly materials, and bearfng and in mfnd the role
that could be played by both the United Nations and regional organizations in
thie reomt,
Firmlv determinmi to elhinete international tertariem in al1 ita forma
and manifeetatfona,
Convincd al80 that the euppreasfon of acte of international terrorim,
incluàFng thoee in which Stateeare directly or Fndirectly hvolved, Le an
eeeential elment for the maintenance of internationalpeace and 8eeurityr
Convincd fu*hec that thoee resPna'Lble for actg of international
terrariam muet be brought to juatiee,
streaeinq the fmperatlve need to further etrengthen international
euoperation between Statee Ln order to take and ados practieal and effective
masures to prevent, combat and elbinate al1 fpms of terrorfsm that affect
the international eamunity ao a whole,
Consclourlof the important role that might be played by,the United
Nations, the relevant epcialized agenciesand Stataa In foatering wideapreed
coopetationin preventinq and ccrmbating Fntsrnational terrorism, Anter alia,
by increasing publieawareneas of the problem,
Bacau the exietinginternational treatiee relating to various
on Offenceo tand Certain oother ActaioCamnittedonim,BardntAireraft, theipedveation
Tokyo on 14 September 1363, the Convention for the Suppressionof Unlawful
Seizute of Aircraft, eigned at The Hegoe on 16 December 1970, the
Convention for the Suppresoion ef Unlawful Acte against the Safety of Civil
Aviation, concluded at Montreal on 23 Septemhr 1971, 10/ the Convention on
the Psevention and Rinialimentof Crfmea againet Internationally Protecteù
Pereons, including DiplcmatFc Agente, adopted in New York on
14 December 1973, W the International Convention againet the Taking of
8/ United Nations, T-r vol. 704, Ho. 10106.
%' Ibfd., vol. 860, 190. 12325.
/ ~bid., vol. 1035, Ho. 15410.A/RE9/49/60
Page d
Hoatagem, acîopted in New York on 17 Datcenrber1979, W the Convention on
thePhyeLeal Protection of Nucleu Uaterial, adopted at Vienna on 3 March 1980,
JJ/ the Protocolfor the Suppreseionof Unlawful Actm of Violence at kirports
Setving International Civil Aviation, supplemuntkty to the Convention for the
suppreaefon of Unlawful Aete againet the safety of Civil Aviation,eigned at
Montteal on 24 February 1988, 24/ the conventionfor the suppressionof
Unlawful Acte against the Safety of Harith Havigation, done at Rome on
10 Harch 1988, JZ/ the Protoeol foc the lupprasmionof Unlawful Acta against
the Safety of Fixed Platforme located on the Continsntal shelf,done at Rome
on 10 Eiareh 1988, W and the Convention on the narkfng of Plastic Expl08ivea
for the Purpoee of Deteetion, done at Montreal on l &ch 1991, =/
yelcminq the conclueion of regionalapreemantsand mutually agreed
deelsrations to c&at and eliminate terrorim in al1 its forme and
manifeetations,
Convincd of the deeirability of kemping undur reviewthe mcope of
exiatinq international legalproviaions to combat terroriam in al1 iti forme
and manifestathna, wLth the aiin of ensuthg a coaiprahensive Iegal framework
for the prevention and elFininatioo nf tt!rro+im,
polemnXvdeelares the follawingt
1. nie Ststea nembers of the Unitad Rations oolemnlyreaffirm their
uneguivocal mndemuation of al1 aets, mhds and practieee of terrorism, aa
criminal and unjuatifiable,whursver and by whomsve+ cammitted, including
tbreateniethefterritoriale integrityyrand ~~curity of Btataiz and people8 and
2. Acte, methode and praetices of tirroriem conetitute a grave
violation of the purpoaesand principles of the United Natione,which may pose
a threat to international mace and iecurity, jeoprdize friendly relations
among Statee, hfnder international cwpration and aim at the deetruetion of
human rights, fundamental fmeâm and the d-ratie baaes of society;
3, criminal acti intend- or caleulated to provoke a etati of terror
in the general public, a group of pereonior partieulu preone for political
purpcraee are in any circumatanee unjuetifiable, whatever the eunslderations of
a political,philoaophical, id~logical, racial, ethnJc, religLoris or any
other nature that may be invoked to jumtify tham$
La/ International Atamic Lnergy Agency, doammit X~LRC/SSS; to bei
publieha in United Mations, mtv Serie*, vol. 1456, Ho. 24631,
W International Civil Aviation Qrganization, document DOC 3518.
/ International Harithe Organitatioa,document SUh/COHF/lS/Reo.l.
io/ Xbid., document SUfi/COtfF/16/Rev.2,
See S/22393 and Corr.1. A/RES/49/60
Page 5
4 States, guided by the purpbees and prineiplee of the Charter of
the United Natione .andother relevantrulee of Internationallaw, muet mfrain
from organizing, instigating, aaeistingor partieipatingin terrorietacte in
territaries of other Statee, or frun acquiescingin srreneoutaging sctivitiea
withintheir territorLee direetetcltowarde the corPrnieaion of euch ncta;
5. States mat also fulfil their obligationsundet the Charter çik the
Unbteû Natione and other prwieions of international law wfth respect ta
combating international terrorim and are urqed to taka effective and lesolute
meaaurer Fn accordance with the relevant provieionsof international law and
international etandarde of human rightafor the apeedyand final eliminaticn
of international torrorim, in particular:
(g) TO refrainfram organizing,instigating,facîlftating,financing,
encouraging or toleratingterroriat activftiee and to take appropriate
pfortterroxistFnstalLatfoneureor trainingcampa,ectior foritheipreparatLonar us&
organization of terroriet acte intendeâ to h cmmitted agai.net other Statea
or their citizen~f
(b) To eneurethe apprehensionand' proeemtion or extradition of
perpetratora of terrorfat acte, in accordance with the relevant prwFafons of
their national lawr
1s) To endeavour to concludespecialagxeementeto that effect on a
bilateral, regionaland multilateralbarrie, and to prepare, to that affect,
del agreements on cooperation;
{A) To eoopi3rate with one another in exchanging relevant information
coneerningthe pravention and eombating of terroriirm~
(g) Te take promptly aL1 etepe necesesty to impl€#entthe existing
international conmntione on thie aubject to which they are parties, ineïuding
the harmonieation of tbeir dŒneetic legialation with thoae conventions;
purpose of ensuring that the amylumurseekerhasornotgrengaged in tarropiate
activities and, after grantingasylum,for the purposeof enauring that the
refugee etatum ie not used in a mner contraxyto the provieiona set wt in
suaparagraph (3) above;
6, In order to c-at effeetively the inerease Fn, snd the growing
international charaetet and effecte of, acke of terroriam, Statee ehauld
enhancerheir c~~perationin thie are8 thtough, in psrti~ular,systemgtizing
the exehangeof Information eoneerningthe prevention and cambatfnq of
terroriem, ae well ae by effective implementation of the relevant
international conventionsand conclueLon of mutual judicial amsisfance and
extradition agreementson a bilateral, regional and multilataral basimt
3. In thie eontext, States are encouragad 20 reviearurgently the
ecop of the exfetinginternational legalprooLeions on the pre~ention,
vlthethe ah anof eneuringthatof thereriie a cmprehensivmarilegal manffestatione,
coverfngal1 aspect8of the matteri framworkA/REJ/49/60
Page 6
8. Purthemore States that have not yet done BO are urged ta
coneider, ae a matter of priority, ùeeaning parties to the international
conventions and protocole relating to varioue aepeeteof international
tarroriem referred tu in the preamble ta the present Declsretion;
9 The United ZTgtione, the relevant ipecialized ugenciaa and
intergovernmental orggnizatian~ and other relevant hâiea muet make every
effort wfth a view to prmoting measureeto cdat and elbinate nets of
terrotifam and to strengthening theh role in thie field;
10. The Seetetary-General ehcnrld aeelet in the Fnipl-ntation of the
practicalmeaeureeion toyenhanceinternationalfetic~~parationt, the follewing
A collection of data on the atatueand implgiilentationof exieting
multilateral, regional and bilateral agreemente relating to international
terrariam, ineluding information on inetdenta caused by international
terrorimn and crimln,al prosecutioneand eenteneing, baeed on information
receioed from the depsitaries of thoee agreemento and from Mar States;
(BI A ecmpndium of national laws and regulationm regardhg the
prevention and euepresaion of international tetrorism in al1 its foms and
rpsnifestatione ,ased on information receivedframneinber States;
(g) An analjrtlcal revlew of anistinginternational legal Instrumente
relating to international terrorism, in order to aseiet Statee Fn ldentifying
aapecte of thie matter that have nat been coversd by euch fnstruittentsand
could be addressed to develop further a egmprehensivelegal frameworkof
conventPone dealing with international terrorism;
(9) A review of gxiatfng poseibilities within the United Natbone
eyetem for aeaisting Statee in organitingworkfihopa and trainhg couraee on
combating erimaa connectecl with international terroriemr
11. Al1 States are urged to promote and implement in goad faith and
effectively the pro vie ion^of the preeent Deelaration in a31 ita aepectst
12- Emphaaia ie placed on the neeü to pursue efforta aiming at
elhinating definitively al1 acta of terrarlsm $y the atrengtheningof
internationalcooperstion snd,prlcrgreasivedevelopment of internationallaw and
ite codification, a8 wefl as by enhancementof coordination htween, and
incteaaeof the efficlency of, the Unitgd Elationa and the relevant specialieed
ageneiee, organiaatione and bodiee. Exhibit 44
Note by the President of the Security Council
(UnitedNations Document S/26861; 10 December 1993)UNITU)
NATIONS
Security Council
Distr.
GENERAL
S/26861
10 December 1993
ORIGINAL: EHGLISH
-
HOT& BY THE PRESIDENTOF TKE SECURITY MIÏNCIL
=ter the consultationsheld on 10 Deeember 1993, the President of the
Security Council issued the followingstatementon behalf of the members in
coaaection with the item relating to the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya:
"The members of the Security Couneilheld informal coaaultationson
119921, by
10 December 1993 pursuant to paraqraph 13 of resolution 748
whieh the Council decided to review every 120 days or sooner, should the
situation sa require, the measures inrposed by paragrapha 3 to 7 against the
Libyan Ar& Jamahiriya.
"After hearing al1 the opinions expressed in the course of
consultations,the President of the Council coneluded that there was no
agreement that the necessary conditions existed for modification of the
measures of sanctionsestablished in paragraphs 3 to 7 of resolution
748 (19921 ." Exhibit 45
Note by the President of the Security Council
(United Nations Document S/P~~~/1994/18; 12 April 1994) Security Council
12 April 1994
ORIGINAL: ENGZISH
- -
NOTE BY TIfEPRESIDENT OF W SECURITY COUNCfL
After the conaultationsheld on 8 April 1994, the Presfdent of the Security
Counckl kesued the followingstatement on khalf of the members in conneetion
wFth the item relatfng To the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya:
"The membersof the Security Council held informal coneultatione on
8 Aphil 1994 pureumat to paragraph 13 of reeolvtion 748 (1992), by which
the CouncLl decided to reviewevery 120 dayn or aooner, ahould the
situation ao require, the masures lmpoeed by paragrapha 3 to 7 againat the
Libyan Arab Jamahiriya.
"After hearing al1 the opinions expreeaeü In the course of
conaultations,the Preekdent of the-Couneil concluded that there wae no
agreementthat the neceasary conditione exiated for modLfication of the
masure8 of sanctions eetablishecl in paragraphe 3 to 7 of resolution
748 (1992)."
94-17567 (E) 120444 12/04/94 Exhibit .46
Note by the President of the Security Cbuncil
(UnitedMations Document~/PRST/1994/41;5 August 1994)UNITED
NATIONS
Security Council
Distr.
GENEML
ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
NOTE BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE SECURITY COUNCIL
Aftar the coneultations held on 5 August 1994, the President of the
Security Council iasued the follovkngmtateoent on behalf of the medaers in
conneetion with the item raliting to tha Libyan -ab Jrni~hiriya:
"The -ri of the Security Council Mld informa1 consultationa on
5 Auguit 1994 pursuant to paragraph 13 of rembution 746 (1992), by whieh
the Council decided,to revieu every 120 dayi or eouner, should the
situation ao require, the measures inposed by paragraphs 3 to 7 against the
Libyan Arab Jamahiriya.
"After hearing al1 the opinions expressed in the course of
eonsultationa, the President of the Council concludeci that there wa8 no
agreement that the necessary conditionsexiated for madification cf the
meaeures of sanctions eatablished in paragraphs 3 to 7 of resolution
748 (1992)."
94-31946 (E) 050894 Q5/08/94
--- Exhibit 47
Note by the President of the Security Council
{United Nations Document~/~~ST/1994/76; 30 November 1994)UNITED
NATlONS
Security Council
Distr.
GENERAL
S/~RST/1994/76
30 November 1994
ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
- - -
NOTE BY THE PRESIDENTOF TME SEcllRITY COUNCIL
After the consultationsheld on 30 November 1994, the President of the
Security Cowicil issued the fallowingstatement on behalf of the members in
connectionwith the item relating to the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya:
*The members of the Security Couneilheld informal consultations on
30 November 1994 pursuant to paragraph 13 a£ reaolution 748 (1992), by
whicb the Council decided to review eveq 120 days or aooner, should the
situation so require, the measures imposed by paragrapb 3 ta 7 againat the
Libyan Arab Jamahiriya.
"After hearing al1 the opinions expressed in the.course of
consultationsthe Presidentof the Council concluded that there was no
agreement that the neçessaryconditionsexisted for modification of the
measures of sanctionsestablishedin paragraphs 3 to 7 of sesolution
748 (19921." Exhibit 48
Note by the President of the Security Council
(UnitedNationsDocument S/PRST/1995/14; 30 March 1995)UNITED
NATIONS
Security Council
S/PRST/1995/14
30 March 1995
ORIGINAL: ENGLISH
NOTE BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE SECURITY COUNCIL
After the consultations held on 30 March 1995, the President of the
Security Council isçued the following statement on behalf of the mernbers in
connection with the item relating to the Libyan Asab Jamahiriya:
"The members of the Security Counckl held informal consultations on
30 March 1995 pureuant to paragraph 13 of resolution 748 (1992), by which
the Council decided to review every 120 daya or sooner, should the
situation so require, the measures imposed by paragsaphs 3 to 7 agaiast the
Libyan Arab Jamahiriya.
"After hearing al1 the opinions expressed in th@ course of
consultations the President of the Couneil concluded that there was no
agreement that the necessary conditions existed for modification of the
measures of sanctions established in paragraphs 3 to 7 of resolution
748 (1992)." Exhibit 49
Letter dated 28 July 1994 £rom the Secretary-General addressed to
the President of the Security Council
(UnitedNations Document ~/1994/900; 29 July 1994) l
UNITED '
NATIONS S
1
Security Council Dieitr.
I GENERaL
S/1994/900
29 July1934
1
ORIGINAL:ENGLISH
I
LETTERDATED 2JULY1994FRQM THESECRETAW-GEHERAf,
I ADPRFSSEM THEPRESIDENOF'PHESECURITYCOUNCIL
1havethe honour to $ring to your attentiattaeheletterdated
I 26 July1994,addreeeedto me bHi8ExcellencyMr.mar Huetafa nuntasser,
Cooperatkon of tSocialiePeople'eLibyaArabJamahiriya.d International
1
(Sianed)BoutroeBOUTROS-GHALI
I
I
I
1
1
1
1
I
1
94-3098(E) 290794 290794
I~/1994/900
Englieh
Page 2
Annex
[Original: Arabie]
Letter dated 26 Julv 1994 from the Permanent Repreeentative
of the Libvan Arab Jarnahiriva to the United Natione addressed
ta the Seeretarv-Generat
1 have the honour to tranemitto you herewith a letter dated 26 July 1994
frm W. Omar Mumitafa Huntaeser, Seeretary of the GeneraLPeople'8 Conmittee for
Foreign Liaison and International Cooperation.
(Siqned) nohamed A. AZWAS
Permanent Repreeentat ive S/1994/900
EngLiah
Page 3
Enclosure
[Original: Arabie]
Peonle's Cwimittee for Poreian Liaison and International
1
1
As you mou, since the adoptionof SecurityCounciL resolutions 731 (1992)
and 748 (1992) the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya hae spared no effort, in a11 eincerity
and good faith, to reaolve the ongoingdispute between it and the United States,
the United Kingdom and France. ThLm is a dispute that the Libyan Asab
Jamahirkya did not wish to see arFse in the firat place; and it aeea no logieal
basis for ita eontinued exiatenee, since it is built on miataken premises, daes
not advanee the legitimate intereet of any party involved and is incompatible
with the climate that currently prevaile world wide.
Par al1 these reasons, the Libyan Arab Jamahitiya ha8 been anxious to
strive by al1 avaklablemeane to end thie dispute Ln a manner thet ia in keeping
with the noms and provisionsof international law and in empliance with the
letterand spirit of the resolutioneadopted by the United Nations. The Libyan
atab Jamahiriya ha8 left no atone unturned to find a way out of thia problem, ae
hae been demonetrated in my numeroue coiamunications with you.
For the paet two yeare, the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya haa endeavoured to
eooperate closely with and to be reepnsive to the orgnns of the United Natkone,
particularly the Security Council, the Secretarfat and the International Court
of Juotiee. It has not limited this cooperation to particular areag but ha8
made it the embodlment of a general position adopted by the Libyan Arab
Jamahiriya in the belief that it ia the duty of al1 Statee Hembers of the United
Natione to show their good faith and demonstrate their rradiness to deal with
the Organization in a positive manner, even if outward appearaneee indicate that
thia may not neceaaarily he in keepingwith their own intereste, a6 long ae eueh
a courge is not incompatible wkth the principleeof sovereignty and the higher
strategie interests of the country.
Let me here place on record the etepa that the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya haa
teken in the eontext of thie poliey:
1. ft haa cmplied fully and unconditionallyuith the Judgmnt of the
International Court of Justice issued on 3 Februaq 1994 cencerning its
territorial diepute with Chad, and an agreement waa aubeequently iigned by the
two countries on 4 April 1994 concerningpractical modalitiesfor the
implementation of the Sudqment.
accordingly, a joint atatement waa issued by the two eountries on
30 May 1934 recording the completionof the withdrawal of al1 Libyan military
and eivilian personnel from the Aouzou Strip with effeet from that date under
the supervision of the United Nations Aouzou Strip Obaerver Group (WASOG) and
in a manner eatisfactory to bath parties.S/1994/900
English
Page 4
In your report to the Security Council contalned in document S/1994/672 you
eslled attentionto the manner in which the Libyan Arab Jamahixiya had acquitted
iteelf and you commended its cooperationwith UNASOG and the spirit of
friendship that had been shown by the two eountriea.
2. Convineed of ehe importance of e-peratFng wkth the United Nations in the
maintenance of international Face and SeCurity, the Libyan Rrab Jamahiriya haa
declared in numerous lettecs addreased to you ita total renunciation of
terrorism in al1 its forma and its condemnation of al1 acta of terrorism. 3t
ham given expression to thii clear position with a number of apecific measures
ineluding, ae purely indicative examples:
(a) The severance of contacta with al1 groupe and factfone involved in
what are charaeterlzed as terrorist actfvltiee;
(b) The affirmation that there are no terrorist training camps or
terroriat organizations inite territory. In thfs connection, the Libyan Arrb
Jamahiriya invited you to send a technical miseion to ascertain thie matter and,
deepite the absence thua far of any reeponeeto thie objective and logical .
propoeal, it renewa its invitation for the dispatch of euch n technieal mieaion;
Ce) Full cooperation by the Libyan Arab JamahirLya,in demonsrration of
its good faith, with the Goverment of the United Kingdom in enhancing ita
capaeity to counter terroriet aetivitise. It haa provided al1 of the
information in ita poeeession that might etrengthen the eapacity to counter and
contain terroriem;
(d) The announcement by the Lfbyan Arab Jamahiriya of ite complete
readknese to cooperate with the French authwrities inveatigatkngthe UTA case
and to provide al1 possible facilitiee to the French examining magiotrate.
Contacte continue to be maintained between the judicial authoritiea in the two
countries with a view to reaching agreementan a programme +O assist the French
examining magistrate in completkng hie taek.
3. There is na extradition agreementbetween the partiea coneerned, and al1 of
the States that are parties to thia dispute are legally bound by the.provisions
of a bindlnq international convention that ha8 entered inta force, namely the
1971 Montreal Convention. Article 7 of the Convention etipulatee that the
Contraeting State in the tesritory of which the alleged offender is found shall,
if it does not extradite him, bring him to trial without delay. The Libyan Ar&
Jamehiriya has expresaed ita seadineaa to try the twa suspecte in Libya, and
thie ie in keeping with the explicit provieion6 of article 7 of the Montreal
Convention.
4. Despite al1 of the foregoing, and in an endeavour to reach a solution
acceptable to al1 the partiee, the Libyan Ar& Jamahiriyaean in principle
accept the holding of the trial outaide Libyanterritory, provided that
procedural parentees Gan be provided to ensure a juet and fair trial for the
two aecueed. The Libyan Arab Jamahiriya is of the view that this can be
aehieved by the partiee coneerned aecepting the propoaal made by the secretariat
of the League of Arab States and endoraed by the Couneil of the League in Fts
resolution 5373 of 27 March 1994, which envisagea the holding of the trial at S/i994/900
English
Page 5
the seat of the InternationalCourt of Justice at The Hague by a Seottiah court
applying Scots Law.
It goee withovt saying that thia propa~almet with the eupport of the
members of the Movement of Non-Aligned Countries at the MinieterialMeeting held
in Cairo last month, and it wai eubeequently supported by the Aaaembly of Heada
of State and Goverment of the Organization of African Unity, meeting in Tunie.
YOU will doubtlesa note that in adopting theae positions the Libyan Arab
Jamahiriya hae gone as far as it is possible tc go and haa reached the end of
the road in seeking a way out of thia problem. It has aecepted a situation that
Ft waa not obligea to aecept in accordance with correct legal noms,
Aceordingly, the Libyan Arab ~amahiriyapropose8 the following alternative8
for addressing the judieial dFmenaion of the criais with a view to determinkng
the reeponsibilityof the two accused for the Lockerbie incident:
1. That the two suspects be brought to trial inimediately in Libya, in
public and with full quarantees to enaure the juatiee and fairnese of the trial,
including the acceptance of international observera;
2. That the trial be held in any Arab country to be agreed upon, either
by the exiating courta or by a specialtribunal instituted for this purpose;
3. That the trial be held at the eeat of the InternationalCourt of
Justice at The Hague or at any United Nations ptemiseaon the European
continent, without oppositionto the trial being conducted $y a Scottish court
applying Scots Law. Should the eountries eoncernedand the United Nationa
accept this proposal and notify the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya accordingly in an
officiel manner, the Libyan Ar& Jamahiriya expreasee its readinees to provide
al1 the guaranteee neeeeeary for ita full and faithful jmplementation, to take
al1 the steps rrquired thereby, includingthe conclueion of agreement8 with the
countriea concerned..and to provide the necessary undertakings to you and to the
Presideat of the Seeurity Council.
The Libyan Arab Jamahiriya requeats you to inform the President of the
seeurity Couneil of the contents of this letter and to establish whatever
contacta you deem appropriate with a view to reaching agreement on the selection
of one of the propoeed alternatives.
(Sianed) Omar Mustafa MUNTASSER
Secretary of the General People's Cornittee for
Foreign Lkaieon and International Cooperatien Exhibit 50
Letter dated 9 December 1993 from the Chargé D'Affaires A.I. of
the Permanent Mission of the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya to the United
Nations addressed to the Seeretary-General
(United Nations Document S/26859; 10 December 1993) Security Council
S/26859
10 Deceder 1993
ENGLISH
ORIGINAL: ARABIC
LETTER DA= 9 DECEMBER 1993 FROM THE CHARGE D'AFFAIRES A.I. OF
THE PE- MISSION OF TEE LIBYAEJ ARAB JAMAHIRIYA TQ THE
UNITED NATIONS ADDRESSED TO THE SECRETARY-GENERAL
I have the honour to transmit herewith two letterç from the Çecretary of
the General People's Cornmittee for Foreign Liaison and International
Cooperation, one dated 8 December 1993, concernlng the initiatives taken by the
Libyan Arab Jamahiriya with a view to finding a solution which meets the
requirements of Security Couneil resolution 731 (1992), and the otber dated
9 December 1993, ccncerning the position adopted by the summit meeting of
African States participating in the machinery for the prevention, settlement and
management of conflicts in Africa, held in Cairo on 6 and 7 December 1993, with
regard to the conflict between the Libyan -ab Jamahiriya, the United Çtates of
America, the United Kingdom and France.
1 should be grateful if you would have the text of this letter and its
annexes circulated as a document of the Security Councll.
(Sisnedl Ibrahim Abd Al Aziz OMAR
Charge d'affaires a.i.S/26853
Engliçh
Page 2
Letter dated 8 December 1993 from the Secsetan of the General
People's Cornmittee for Foreiqn Relations and International
Cooperation of the Libyan Arab Jarnahiriva addressed to the
Secretarv-General
With reference to the letters dated II September 1993, 11 Octaber 1993,
3 NoverPLber 1993 and 30 November 1993, I have the hanour to inform you that the
Great Socialist People's Libyan Arab ~amahiriya, reaffirming its desire to reach
a settlement of the conflict provoked by the three Western States ever the
Lockerbie case, has, followirig the adoption of Security Council reçolution
883 (1993), taken several initiatives, directly or in consultation with friendly
countries. These initiatives are aimed at finding a solution which meets the
requirernentç of Security Council resolution 731 (1392) and settling the dispute
between the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya and the three Western States over the means ,
of implernenting that resolutibn.
Thus, Colonel Muamrnar Qaddafi, leader of the glorious revolution cf
I Septeder, sent a letter dated 25 November 1993 to His Holiness
Pope John Paul II, in which he expreçsed his desire to cooperate with
His Holiness and with Presidents Clinton and Mitterrand and Prime bfinister
John Major of the United Kingdom In determining the venue of a fair trial which
would be acceptable to the suspects, their families and their lawyerç.
Likewise, the sister Republic of hrnisia, which holds the chairmanship of
the Arab Maghreb Union, proposed, in consultation with the Libyan Arab
Jamahiriya, that the two suspects be interrogated and tried in France, as that
country is one of the sponsors of Security Couneil resolutions 731 (19921,
748 (3992) and 883 (19931, relating to the dispute between the Libyan Arab
Jamahiriya and the Western States concemed.
hirthermore, the Arab Republic of Eqypt in consultation with the Great
Jamahiriya, proposed to the Goverriment of the United Kingdom that the two
suspects be tried by a Scottish Court under the legislation applied in Scotland,
provided that the trial were held in a third country or at the headquarters of
the International Court of Justice in The Hague. No reply haç been received to
this proposal.
As we indicated in our letter of 11 October 1993, the position of the
lawyers for the tww suspects, as stated on 10 October 1993, has lirnited the
arguments that the Libyan authorities might advance to persuade the suspects to
travel to Scotland.
we believe that the initiatives we took Eollowing the adoption of Security
council resolution.8B3 (1993) will meet the approval of the two suspects and
their lawyers and help the Security Council to discover the identity af the
perpetratar of the bombing of Pan Am flight 103 and to puniçh him, and also to
guar5ntee the right of the victirnç' families to receive compensation for the
loss they suffered as a result of that tragic bombiag. S/26859
English
Page 3
In a desire tu resolve certain issues which appeared complex and diffirult
to resolve, the Security Council has reconsideredmore than one of its
resolutionç, such as resolution 799 (1992) of 18 December 1992 and resolution
837 (1993) of 6 June 1993, whrch was modified by resolution 885 11993) of
16 November 1993.
The go~d faith of the three Western States and the sincere efforts which we
have no doubt the Charter of the United Nations avthorizes you to make and also
paragraph 4 of Security Couneil resolution 731 (1992) and paragraph 14 of
resolution 883 (1993) are, without a doubt, al1 elements which wilL make it
possible to reach a settlement that respects international legality and
preserves Libyan sovereignty and the honour of its people.
1 should like to request that thiç letter be circulated as an official
document of the General Assembly and of the Security Council and that you cal1
for conçultations on the aforesaid initiativeswith a view to taking a position
thereon .
(Siqnedl Omar Mustafa EL-MUNTASSER
Secretary of the General People's
Cornmittee for Foreign Liaison and
International CooperationS/26859
English
Page 4
Letter dated 9 Deeember 1993 £rom the Secretarv of the General
People" Cornmittee for Foreisn Relations and International
Cooperation of the Libvan Arab Jarnahiriva addressed to the
Secretam-General
As you know, on 6 and 7 December 1993, a sumit meeting of the African
corntries which are members of the mechanism to prevent, manage and settle
confliets in Africa, took place in Cairo.
Arnong the items on its agenda, the meeting considered the question of the
conflict between the great Socialist People's Libya kab Jamahiriya and the
three Western States, namely, the United States of America, France and the
United Kingdom. The meeting adopted a declaration, of which 1 have the pleasure
to transmit to you the paragraph concerning the question that relates to my
country., which 1 request you to have citculated as a document of the General
Assembly and the Security Çouncil. The text reads as followç:
With regard to th& request by the Libyan Government, the Heads of State and
Government considered the dispute between the Libyan Ar& Jamahiriya and the
United States of America, France and the United Kingdom, tcok into account the
reçclutions of the Security Council and recalled those adopted by the
Organization of African Wnity in Caira in 1993.
They also launched an appeal for the peaceful settlement of disputes,
requeçted that the two suspects should be given a fair trial in a neutral
country, and called upon the Secretary-Generalof the Organization to fallaw the
question closely and subrnit a report on the peaceful settlement of the matter.
Accept, Sir, the assurances of my highest consideration.
(Sisnedl Omar Mustafa EL-MUNTASSER
Secretary of the Gcneral People's
Cornmittee for Foreign Liaison and
International Cooperation Exhibit 51
Letter dated 30 March 1995 from the Permanent Representatives of
France, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Irekand
and the United States of America to the United Nations
addressed to the Secretary-General
(United Nations Document ~/50/128-S/1995/247; 30 March 1995) GeneralAssembly
Security Council
A/SO/iZS
S/l99S/247 d
30 March 1995
ENGLISH
ORIGINAL: ENGI'ISHAND
FRENCH
GENERU ASSEMBLY SECüRITY COLTHCIL
Piftiethsession Fiftieth year
Item 149 of the prelirninary list*
MERÇURES TO ELIMINATE
INTERNATIONALTERRORISM
Letter dated 30 March 1995 £rom the Permanent Renresentatives
of France. the United ninqdom of Great Britain and Northern
Ireland and the United States of Ameriea to the United Nations
addressed to the Secretam-General
We have the honour to transmit herewith the text of a tripartite
declaration isaued by our three Governments on 36 March 1995 eoncerningthe
implernentation of Security Counciï reselutions 731 (1992) of 21 January 1992,
748 (1992) of 31 mrch 1992 and 833 (1993) of 11 November 1993 by the Dibyan
Arab Jamahiriya.
We should be grateful if you vould have the .text of the present letter and
its annex circulated as a document of the GerieralAssembly, under item 149 of
the preliminaq list, and of the Security Council.
(Sisned) Jean-Bernard M~RI~~E (Sisnedl David H. A. WUiHAY
Permanent Representative of France Permanent Represenfativeof the
to the United Nations United Kingdom of Great Britain
and Northern Xseland lo the
United Nations
(Sisnedl Madeleine K. ALBRIGHT
Permanent Representative of
the United States of America
to the United NationsA/sO/lZe
S/1995/247
gngl iah
Page 2
Deciararion dated 30 March 1995 by the Governments of France, the
United Kinqdcimof Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the United
States of America on the occasion of the ninth review of sanctions
imosed on the Libvan Ara$ Jarnahiriva bv the Seeurity council in
itg resolutioa 748 (1992) af 31 March 1992
France, The United Kingdomof Great Britain and Horthern Ireland nnd the
United States of America rea£fim their joint declaration of 5 August 1994
'
(~/1994/938) and their eonnnon determination to bring to justice those
responaible for the bombinge of flighta Pan Am 103 and UTA 772.
The three States regret that the Libyan Arab Jamahlriya has still not
satiafied the French judicial authoritieswith respect to the bombang of flight
ZPTA 572.
They are dodtted to full and comprehensive enforcement of the sanctions
impusedon the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya.
They alao reaffirm that the Libyan Ar* Javhiriya must cmit itself
definitivelyto ceaaing al1 fom of terrorist activity and all aasiatanee to
terroriat groups and demonstrate , by concrete actions, its renunciation of
ternoriam.
They rekterate that, in aceordancewith the Security Council resolutions,
the Government of the Libyari Arab Jamahiriyamust ensure the appearanee of the
tw~ Loekerbie suspects in the United Kingdom or United States, where they will
reeeive a fair trial. The three States reaffi~ that alternativeproposals for
trial in The Hague or elsewhere do not meet the SecurityCouncil requirernents
and are therefore unacceptable.Review of the Role of the InternationalCourt of Justice,
Report of the Sixth Cornmittee
(United Nations Document A/8238; 11 December 1970) -L
GENERAL
ASSEMBlY u ânciikr i~
wmlI -n/rirrirn
?bnty-TiRh mirilon
hp* irr 36
III. -TE ........................ 37-68J.-YnrlLbielrolrL~CL~rin
(r/c.ULWk.o)rirrair MM-
- -- - A/c.uL-h*& .. ru niam 4 it Lm u LPI *t th #.h -.Hi Of +b.
b~w b t~ ma ~LLUOI, LE -* w~tb *r~itl.31 ai
st.tu*i.
*7. ftni wtd git mnwtbirpobh ea*ldbi ittHBtEd tk.
to - emia m -du, - rlw hi -.id tait 1%u b.
-rd tΠUi M - * wu- rn rllquiumΠmlruq Co
JaiitlrUor iiI orip v-, 1- -eh k ni& a*tbi -;ai. fhi
Aictln d iiwril- WW r a wΠpipblm ci~oldif8Um oitbi rrttReview of the Role of the International Court of Justice,
Report of the Sixth Cornmittee '
{UnitedNations Document A/8568; 10 December 1971) cauu
GENERAL
rllW
ASSEMBLY 10 Dieiorr 19n
gGL=-n
0ii:crw. -
PNIN CfX WU W ?Kt mflOUL O?JLSTIS
III. Dm-. ........................ 20 - bf 1t
A. %e rolr O? Mi latirnstionrl Cwr of Juitiu
rialu tw t-th or tk Unltrl rititi* ...... 21 - 23 13
1. iba piirr ai th. Cwt Ha oi th. Jdcirl
iitrl.rnr of 4iiprt.i inUr mfitr atmbliihrd
ai hitd Iitimi Uit .......... 21 . ;r 10
2. ï3u mlr p-4 by th* ca- ........... 23 1?
2 luton riirtim ro tnr or#mluiien, Jurii4ietiw
d prced- 4 ut- of ot mi Cmt Xi - h9 :\
(11 nw -Lit- or Znr cowt ...... P - I.'uuys
-1iih
Pi*. 2
riil Rw quiitioli or th. cqul.0-
juraidlstlon or Ph Coirrr ....
.7. >r quntion ef thi rrrirror thi rol? or th- t- .
?. 7h qwitim or tni ir*iiiw or th Sutut* ... imti tbi M'i pra.la. 8-m- of tiin mm. -. thit tbi I w
ofmririPii ru rrm am Qw ta th piri- ail*ii. .hieh m
miutai oftlrlhiri id mtpmmro. ft wrlw thit tbi
c&'i wtml a? tM diath of wittin d orrl vudimi 0-4 k
atm-. Mai- ru JW rd0 Of i iu~fritian tkrt *hi eovtr i-4 ri
iasm te Wr a hloioo M pwliibw obJ+eti~ni u luitklt u pnoiiU.
ud to rtiraln frm Jolnia Chi *o th. mlti mlni LC ni rtrietb nrmtiri.
M. S1.ml ript.oot~tiw. mti4 th bhh coi: ot bifmn ri*
tam. Bai of th. bani.r. obi- thit itnei V# 7rntil *-mi of th
wri pi4 w tb* ~ait.d ~tiono. rbi puriin wrt iiguiri~ ro w tbi
1-8 if tbeir -1. & tbir ubitnti- *u ~rarrally caridiria mi wm
ii~ii*.. Skirreei ru J* to um idri of iitabliraiw b NatihtiW
miin- M to Wi Iltiamtim rorri: It wu iIio iwntrd r&t tn. LW-
kti- #-4 &mu up lia oradilid in-*id juriiti - autia
eadri qw. witl th -ti Liia pl4 im tai La quiCioo.
M. fr ditiai. itu --Cid rhrr Anlcli 25 d Adel. 53. pripiph 1.
or 5hr Iwuto inarll ~i rrdd tr AIH ilimly pria- qwni rsd to
-oh th -ria rd* of 8b bih..llrar.ESSAYS ON THE DEVELOPMENT
OF THE INTERNATIONAL
LEGAL ORDER
imemorof
HARO F.VAN PANHUYS
FrktaJobaG,Lamersypand
SUTHOFF& NOORDHOFf:1980
AlphenadeRijn,TheNerhedands
RMe, Maryland USA Exhibit 54
M. Lachs, "The Revised Procedure of the International Court of
Justice" .- in nssays on cne ueveLopl~t~i1~ ,..m....UL m111~..111~ELlld-L: qn~l LILmy1u~
Order, pp. 21, 31 (1980) MANFRED LACHS
The RevisedProcedure ofthe International
Court of Justice1
1. Introduction
"We could, ofcourse, constmcta model of a legai system whichdid
notincludt judicialdecision-making-where theniles were perfectly
clearproviding unambiguous directionfor al1conceivabltsituations
andwherecornpliance was ptrfecsothat disputesneverarose 2."
Thisisa veryinterestingpropositionbua veryunrealont. The sug-
gested"modev'could notpossiblybe devised,as reality-and indeed
law itself-by its vcry natand functions,crtates situationsbetwcen
menand betweennationsinwhichdisputes areboundto anse:differen-
cesconfrontations,onflicts.Irinliesenintheruleof lawthatthelaw
mustbe interpretewhen diffcrentapproachesarepossiblequestionsas
tothebindingcharactcrof individualniles cannorbutariscfactorsof
timeandplace,changes intherubjectsoflaw,and manyofheïelcments,
exert decisiveinfluenceonthc applicationoflaw assuch, Le.,its im-
plemtntarion.Then again,situationswil inevitablanse wheresome
subjcctsof lawrefuse20 compiy witba panicularmie asthey deny its
applicabilior evenexistence
Thariswhy proceduresareneeded forthe rtsolutioof disputtand
for the clarificationothe law by the confirmationor concetion of
particularintcrprttationOnt such procedureleading ta this endin
inteniauonalrelationsthe mOSK advanccd and the mat sophistieatcd,
isundoubtdly thatoffert. bythe internationaljudicialsystem,cpit*
mizedby the InternationaCourt of JusticeFrom hc very beginning
mies ofinttrnaUondprcmdure have had grtat autonomy.This was,
ofcourse, anaumncimy of aformalcharaaer whereby thearbitraltri-
1.Rulu ofCwrt idoptcdin 197s;Roolution cooccrningthe ZntJuU
Prpcricdopted in1976.
2.G. Hugk 'Rulu.Polikyand Dwsion-Makingin tw,Reuon andJrmiŒ",
inb s in&el Philorophy, cd.idc(NewYork. 1969).p. 1a.,G, Mdli
Coiilrovrh InicrMziodc, Quulîoiu,Pmc+w. Ifntcmationd&nuove-
Quationr.Procodml in aRi* diDirinaiuterairi;oofas 1-2(1977) p. 9
etseg.buad, commissionor court was empowtred talaydown niles ofprocc-
dure.'
Throughout tht nineteenthcentury thisautonomou cvoIution con-
tinued,to alminate with the establishmentofthe PermanentCoun of
Arbiuation.'In our own ceniury,when the Permanen toun of Inter-
nationalJustitcwas created,it wasgivenspecificfreedom by itStatutt
tocstablishitsown rule sfprocedure. Thus was the evoiutionçonflnn-
ed,and thePermanenC t ourt ofInternationlusticetook fuladvantage
bath of thatfrdom and mutaris mutandis of the exemplary mies al-
readypraaid in matters of arbitrationThe Rulcsof the fermanent
Cornof InternationalJusticeasis wellknown, were inhented by the
prtsentInternationalCoun of Jusfice,andsa, by the rame roken, wu
thetraditionof ahundrcdyears.
'fhtconsecrationof this autonomy was fis?exprtssed in the pro-
visionsofthe originaArticle 30 of theStatuteofthe Permanent Coun
of InternationalJustic wehich confened upon itthe righr LQ "'frame
rulesfor rcgularinitsprocedurc".7his was latcramended, and Anicle
30 reflccteda duairightof theCourt, in chatitrnightfrarne"niles for
carryingout itsfunetions"while "inparticular t shalllay down niles
of procedurc".Thus nila of two cattgorieswere 10 be elaborated by
theCourt,and tbese nilesfindly foundtheu refltcrioninrwo typesof
instniment, namely,tbc niles ofpr~dure before the Court and the
des conctming procedure within the Court.'Irwas in 1931 that the
Permanent CourtofInternational Justiceadoptai a resolution on its
"InternatJudiciaIPractie". Thiscouldbc viewtd as havingimplement-
ed the'latterpartofrhc rtvisedprovisionof Article30 of the Statute.'
As tomlesd procedute before theCourt,the Ptrmanent Coufi was
ablerortly upon thecopiouspracticeof thearbitration tribunal5tbat
hadbeen cplled into beingthroughoui thenineteenthcentury I.also
3. "Whetherso expresscd or ninthe protocol",commisionrwereheld 10
have "aninbtrcntrightto sstablisb mgoverningthe rnattcrrof prcseniarion
and consideraiion casesubmittcdIOihm"; J.H. RalstonThc Law ond Pro-
cedure ofInreïnnri~nTriburia(Stanford:StanfordUniv. Prc1926). p.204,
para 365-
Sinccthe Ahbarna casit hasbcegenenlly rccognirfollowintbcearlicr
prcctdcntsbat.inthe absenceofany agrcemtoi ithecontrary, an inter-
aihd tribunabas the rigto decidc atoitown jurindictand ithar
tbc ver to interpm for thipurposetbtinsmrnmts which govem that
iurisdiniw, 1URcpons 1953.p.119.
4. Cf.An. 74of theHague Convention1307:"thetribunalii entittoissue
mlm of pdure fortheuinduct othe case.."
5.PCUSr. D No.2,pp. 103etscq.
6. PCU k. D NO. 2.3d Add, pp. 403404,842-841. made useof ihe rulestaiddown bythe cwerHagueC~nventions of 1899
and 1907.:
But to what extentdid the rules Iaid down by such international
organs, in theexerciseof rheirautonomy, ditfer from those imposed
upon domestic courts'?Herz one caiinoi escape the impression [bar
manyofthe ideas andconceptsreflected in domestic jurisdictiohave
Eoundtheir way inro internarionaproceedings.Thase who drafted the
rulesineaçh casewere, no doubt, inftuencever- largely bytheschoois
or systemsthey belonsed to..4nd.sureenoughi, twasclaimedthat some
rulesofthe PermanentCourr of Interna~ional justice were"a sort of
combinationof theprocedure inAnglo-Saxon countriesand thatfollow-
edon thecontinenr".QItwas even asserted tha"the divergencebetween
the Anglo-Saxo nnd continentalstandpoints.. .prevented members
-
representingthose differentstandpointsftom readingthe relevantpro-
visionsin the same rnanner".'OThis howeves, may carry the issuezoo
far.But itis of intereto note thatin 1926, whenrevision ofthe niles
on a specificpointwas discusseditwas suggested that"theStatutemusc
be construed in such a way as to hold a middle coune betweenthose
two sysrerns,andis could nor be read exclusivelyin the spiriof the
Anglo-saxon syçtemw.'I
Ciaims were made by representativeof borhsystems: ilwas argued
inone connectlonthat"the Coun hadbeen createdin accordance with
the continentalconceprion: it wasan entitya body which gave judg-
ment assueh and wasto bcregarded as SUC^".^ N^eedlessto Say,such
claims,farfsom being conceded, rnerelyservtd tokeep alivethe sense
of dichofomy beMnd theSiatuteand to emphasise the necessitynotonly
of interpretingitsprovisions in thespirit ofreasonablecompromise,
but aiso otfinding the middle road where the Coun could ehoose i!s
own paih,namelyin framingits mlts ofprocedure.Even so,the faix
7.Compare ihc earIiernila of the new Ganadiui Commissionof 1857,
Moori'rHisroq and Digrnof the International Arbirmrions zo rhcUnited
Smirshar been uyany,p. 2138, andotbeCommissions.
8.So it wrr-cd: Such commissionsas have bttn leinflucaccdbylech-
nicalirim of tcornmon law and to alirgtr degrtcontrollcd bthe greater
fretdomin mittasof pwice prewoilingunderheCivilbw, have, anolois ui
the coumeofiusticobtun+d mut& with 1-brirdtrwmenila" Rdston, opcit.,
p.2M, pu 355.
9. iam wirh ïefercnto Aniclc45of rhcSuluteof theCM rs adoptcby
th Ptrminmr Coun tht thiitatemtatw made.PCI] Scr.D No. 2, 3rd Ad&.
p. 2S1,suirmeabythe Preaidwtwhen the sevisiof thenilu ofproetdurewu
&us& in 1935.
IO.Statcmeacby thetint Pmidcnt ofthe Çoun. Mer, KU Sb. D No. 2,
Add, p. 101.
11.Scr.D Na 2,Add. p. 2OZ
iZ h. citp. 195.thatpdure itsticnjoyd a diiftrentstatu in differentmunicipal
systems ofIaw, mnstitutodanever-prcstntMurcc 01 potcnUal disagra-
ment.I Ietb iticreforethatMore pding Wtr a disgr-ion may
be helpful:to rcficabrieflyon produral law in gentrai, andon the
historicadistinctionbttwecn thedlcd "continental" aod "cornmon
Eaw" s~tcms.
Itcannot bcdcnid that tbeinternationaljudiual sys'icbashmt
part of thatwide branchof jurispnrdcnoewhichindudes the organi-
zationof the judiciary,irs cornpetenceand, in gencralwhat hasbece
called"le droit judiciairc".l'
InFranct itisgtntralfy cal14 "le droit judieiairc prive"bu; this
1st adjectivecan perhnpsk a source of ndlçss conhion. For even
"civil" procedure perfom a publie function: islays down ruiesfor
the intcrvcntionof cow to prottet rightsof the individual,of the
State and soEictyas a wholc.~4It is thereforcmoreimponanrrocon-
sider the funetionalcharacttr of what wt cal] "proctdurd law", as
aninstrumentfor the implementationof substantivenila in orderthat
justicemay be adrninistered.It cannot, hawevtr, bc ovcrlooked that
prmoduresart mrant to assure the functioning of the machincry of
justiceto ensurethatthelawis respmcd in thevery courseof its nppli-
catio nn:otherwordsto protectthesubje~tsof lawandthetfftctivencss
ofits provisions.It thcreforbecornesdear thatgrdural law has a
Januslikccharactcr and performs a double service .1c4historicaUy,
aswe know,prdure hasbeen vitwtd asa formalisticclemens of law,
one dtprived ofautonomy and mcrcly subsidia iry~ht ogcraUon of
thelaw.
Bearingin mind thisspecial dualism,ont should not be surpriscd
thatprocedurr has dcvcloped as a distincbranehof law. It isnot
everybsdy'sfavourittbranch.Formal as itis byvery definitionithas
attractodthe odium reservedfor the vacuour.At the samt timc this
formalismtanbe defcnded asnecessary to protect whattver person
appcarsbeforc a court,from arbitrarytreatment."Howtver, exaggerated
13.R. Morel,Traite iltmentaire de proccdcivil[Eltmcntary freatise of
CivilPtoccdurcl(ParisRccuciSirey,1949).
14.H. Solus andR. Pcrrot, Drojudiciairprivé[Civil JudiciProcedurel
[farisRecueiSirey, 1961pp.12-14,
15.Cf.theAusrian Code of1895 and thGerman Code of 1877.CI. W. Sied-
IcekiCiviProctdurs lin Polishl (Waww,19771,pp.10-12: hcmaintainsthat
according te Polish CivilPro~edurt serves iht mlc oflaw.
16."LP pmédure pknte, eneffet un doublevisageElle esà la foisoli-
daire du dmii aubstanetaindépendanteparrappon a lui." J. Vincent,Proci-
durecivil[CivilFtoctdur(ParisDalloz,1976), p3.
57."Lefonndirmt. entenducomme une protectioncuntrel'arbitraijuge,
cwimc uneluantic delibtrtt dla diftnse sens lagtne sauraidisparaître."
S.Vincent. op. cit.. SecalsoSiedlccb, op.eiL, p. 1stq- formalismma! lead to inconvenience,become a weapon forabuse; it
may delay and thus in some circumstancesdenythe administrauonof
justice. The radanser inherentina very sophisticaiedprocedureis
rhat imay beginto liveiisown Jife and become 111-adapteto the
changes ofsubsrantivelaw. tachanges tnthe structurof societies.
When thishappens,itceasesroperform the constmctive functionfor
which itwas designedNot infrequently, procedural mles haserved
the distonionof law,have outtivedtheir usefulness.and have thus
createdan abyss between the strictly forma1and tsubstantivpro-
visionsoflaw.
Municipallegalsysremshave triedrodeal wiih rheseissues for cen-
turiesWhat are knownioday as rheadversaryorassome call i"Party
presentation" and "inquisitorial"or "judicial investigarion" systems
have evolved throughour history. It wonh recatling thathefirst
Roman judgeswere in part privatjudges(iudex unus)appointed by
the agreementofthepartie He.ncethedesisi ohnehanded down war
judiciumprivatum.On theother hand,thcrt waç the magistrate,the
jurisdictijudge. nitre were two prmedures, one in jure and one
apud judicium. nijudge had nojurisdictionapower,and ifthejudg-
ment was not voluntanlycarriedout,a ncw action by themagistrate
was necssay. Inthe course of time, this old Romanprocedur was
replacedby pubiicprocedureand ajudicialprocedurwhich basevolved
as an instrumentofpublicordtr.On ttit oththand,the old Gennanis
law had itsorigininthe atoncmentprocedureand it latevolvedundct
the influenceof Roman procedure,of thatin Italiacitieç anCanon
Law when itentcredhto wordlyaffairs.
Partypresentatiowas ariginalldominant inhth Roman and,later,
Gcrmanic taw.Itwas thepanies who retaintdthe powerof freclydis-
posingof theirrightsInthe courseof time thjudgccame tcithe£ore-
front.Tfie arstcodificationsof Europewere Mm- in Pmsia, that
of Frcderiekthe Great,publishtdafttrhi deathin 1793; in Austria,
the codificatioof Maria Thema; in France,firstthe ordinancs of
Louis XW, andlaterthe de of Napolwn.lB
The common lawsystemtoo showcd some iducncc of Roman Canon
and Gemanic Law.li Howcver, the latcr dcvelopment of An@*
Amcricancivil procedures"has goneoa irway, dcriviaguothing€rom
18.Cornpue oaIhe subjeAtEqelmin et al., Hkioy ofConiinrnrd Civif
Pro~cdir?~(blldo8: Mmy,1928)p. 3et W. dW t#.to&citiooi,
fw i-tanccin Poliad: Neai CiCodc,Fdy hw, Code 01 CivilP~WC
iad Pnvitc Intematidbw. 19-1965.
!P.S# R.W. Mill= Seme Cmpwativc Arpe~lrot CiviPledngr undn
RngbArncricolord Coniii41ualSyn*mi12 Amcnuo Bu Mtioo J d
(1926) 4û7.withoutand devolving from within the elemenrs ateded for Ïtsamcnd-
ment andpro gr es^".^
As in al1law,the religious elementhas played a role in the deveiop-
mentof procedure, from the atonementexistingin Gemanic Law to
the formula known in Common Law.ti
Inhistoricalperspective,procedure fias developed asthe result of
encouritersbetween various national system sf,changesin thestructure
of Statesand therole of couns.* It iworth noting rhat half a century
ago an auihoritystated that "it isprobable that the changes in sub-
stantivelaw during the Iastcentury and a half have ken much Sreater
than the changes in procedure".= Whether national procedures havc
cauphtup with the requirernentr of our own timesis a matrerwhicti
neednot bepursued here.
In point of faet, the laçt decadeshave brougbtserious changes.'*
Broadly speaking, more thsn two systems continue to exisrside bysidt.
Ttiere has been an evolution. For example, in French law, where "les
habitudesdu Palais conduisaient a abandonne a directiondu procès
aux plaideurset i leurse~nseils",~~aduaIly attempts havebeen made
20. Thiswas wtt expresrtd bySir FredcrickPollockwhcn he saidrhar
the battlcof pleadcrswhich wcre fnughrfor six cenruriebeforcourLady
rhr Common Law ai Wtstminstcr,wcre tme to an oldcrtraditionand ihc
traditionissiilaliveundcral1 the changes of outwardform. Ziiigatio...
isa game in whichthe coun is umpin. Expansion ofComrnon Inw. pp. 33-
34; and Engelman, op.cil.pp. 3-4.
21. "LordEudge, 1 cornplaito God and thec."thus,asit hasbcen put. "The
Judgc sar no:10rry~hc casebu1 to aidrhcplaintiff in obiainthe judgmcnt of
God." Poltcck.op. cit.pp. 142 and 143. Sce tooEngdman, op. cit.p.39.In
Gtnnan Law ihrformula rad "HemRichter ich KIngtGot und ju".
22. Cf.Giuseppc Chiovenola:"Roman and Germanie Elcmentsin Continental
Procedure"4Lecture delivtrtda! the Ynivtrsiryof Palma, 5 Deccrnber 1901).
publishcdas an anncxto Engdman: op.cir.p. 911.
23. S. Williston.Imroduetionto A Histov oiC~nrinrnial CivilProecdurc,
op. rit.p. LX.
21.Cf.. for innanee.iht cvoiution ofFrcneh proccduralCaw,dating back io
1667:thedecisionof theConsriruanrcof 16 to 24Augusl 1790. Code dc Proei-
dtirc Civilof 1806with 11s1042 Articles. wisrnailamcndments of 1837. 184 1
and 1BS8h ,aiïemained in foretuniil1935.Since thtn many changes havc bctn
inrroduced:in 1938, 1942 and 1944;a nm Draft Code ofcivil Proeedure was
prtscntedin 1954:funher changes wttc introduccdasa rcrulrof the change of
Cons~itutionin1958and 1969,1971, 1972 and 1973 .1wasonly in 1975 thathe
newCode de ProcidureCii~iEwas introduccdin France.as thecxpmsion of rhe
most dcm approachof theFrench judicialsyrtcmto pr~ctdurr.
15. J. Vincentop. cii,. p. 507. and ht ad"Ilat exactque dans la tradition
française.eiendCpitde cenains eformes le jugecivil n'avopar ladirectiondu
procès."; opcit.p. 510 (emphasisaddtd). Secalso R. Dbiry, "Lt roledu juge
danslc dCroulerncnde l'instancecivilein Dalloz.Reeucil analiriquc dejum-
prudence. 1946: 145 Chronique. and J.Normand,L'office du jrrgeel/a contes-
ratio[TheJY~~E'O sfficeand the Contesr],(TaniaLille,Paris1965). to strengthen the position of the judge and bestow upon him greater
initiative and power in the proceedings. Thus, he içable to eive im-
pulsion tothe proceedings and todetermine what is crilted the"ryrh-
mes" or "styiesI" n.the German. Italian and orher conttnen~al pro-
cedures,the sole of the judge has becorne much srronger. InPoland,
in the lighof recent codification. it is evenmore50.:~ In conrrast. the
Arnerican systern remainç one in which "the parties are in the main
chargeof thelitigationprocess... theadjudicators are passive, receptive,
reactive'";and itwas pointed out in a very interestingway rhat, -'like
Adam Smith'seconomicmodel. the adversa- justice modei is simpler
and loveliecthan the factsof life".':
It is notmy present purposeto oblise any ofthese broadsyslerns oE
procedurai law to plead lheirmerits before us.and to sitas judg epon
them. But in turning io thespecific fieldofenquiry, it is interestinto
recalithe influenceofthese ostensibly çontrasting municipal systemson
thedevelopment of the international judiciat procedure.
It isagainstrhis background that the evolution of the mles of pro-
cedurein the Permanent Coun of InternationalJustice and the Inter-
nationalCoun of Justice needs tobe viewed. Following the establish-
ment of the lirst Permanent Coun of International Justice, the first
Rules were elaborated in1922. Funher attempts ro revise and irnprove
them were made inthe following years. The first revisions were made
in1925 and in 1926; additional modifications were adopted in 1927,
and orher revisions were made in 1931 and 1936. The presenrCourt
re-adopted theold Rulesin 1946 with veryfew changes. However, aher
twenty years ofapplying them the Coun deeided ro take a freshlook,
with a viewto improving them and adapting them to the rapidly chang-
ing needsof the internationalcomrnunity. It may be said frankly that
perhaps some of the mles adopted in 1946 automaricaiiv, as it were,
from the Permanent Court of InternationalJustice of 1936, were not
26. The nw Code of Civil Proctdurt impoxsupon the Courtthe duty toin-
vertigatal1 aspcas ofa case(An. 3, para. 2) itactand law:the dominating
factorirthe scarchfor lhc objectivetnitthus, ihcCourt is aeirhcr bounby
the admissionsota pany, nor by an opp~~itiontaevidcnccit wishesio cal1ex
oJJiciocgen thepassivattitudeofthedefendant doesnot reiitve tCoun from
the obli~atiota invcrtigarthe foundationof theplaintiffsclaim. Cf. J. Jd-
lomki, Inifoducfiota tkr SyricmO/Civil Procedure[in Polishl[Wanaw. 1974);
W. Benuwiu, Ourlincof CivilProcedure [in Polish(Wariaw, 1974): Z Rcsich,
Res Judic~~ariaPolisb]{Wamw. 1978); andSiedlccti. op. cpp.52-60.
27. M.E Fraakei.From PrivatFi& IOPublic/urtict5 INew York Univer-
sity LÏw Revicw (Ociobcr 19761pp. 516-537,at pp. 516-517. A pioncein ihc
fieldof improverneatof the existiap systtin bis couarryJudge Frankel de-
velopcdhif idePrinsevtrol studus: ThAdversary Judge.54 Texas Law Rcvicw,
NO. 3 (Mh 1976) pp. 465487: Curing Lowyerr' Incompctenct: primnmnon
noc'cre10 Cnigbtoa Law Rtvitw, No. 4 (June19'17)pp, 613-639. indicationas are indispensableforlitigant panies" an"to inforni
rtioswho areresponsrb\efor rht conducof a casebefore the Coun
what stephave robetakenandwhen andhow".$i However, the matter
eoesmuch furtherïhe objectiveofthe Rules, within the framework
of theStatuteis to detemint the rightsand duriesothepanies and
rhenghtsandduriesof theCoun. WhentheCoun isattendinto acase,
thepublicproceedingsinvolva dialoguebetween thepartiestheStates
orinternationalorganizationsappearingbeforeit.The Coun and its
members keep, ofcourse,theirown counxt, but by directingthepro-
cetdingsand quesrioningthe agents.counsel, witnesses and experts,
takepart inthatdialogue. Yo lessimportant for~he deeisionto bt
takea bytheCoun isthe privatedialogue carrieon among members
ofthe Court in the courseof deliberation. one bears in mind the
numberof judgedinvolved. and the significanctof tquestionslaid
before thern, ~hemtthod ofdeliberationis of paramountimportance
tothe finalresulThus twotypesofprovisions areinvolve de:Rules,
andInttrnalJudicialPracuc~.~~
2. The Rulesof Court
nitrights ofthepartiesand rhtirstatubcfort theCoun btlong tothe
fundamental issueswithinthe framtworkof anyjuditial procedure.
fn thecase ofthe InternationaCourtofJusrice, once a Stateasb for
a disputeto te scttlcd, the Couris ofcourseunder an obligationto .
procd in such a way as tosafcguardsuch ri&& asthai Statenay
posstssqrcelitigantHowcvcr, thepositionof theothcr partyisofkcy
importarice.If there ian agreemen thvotn tht panics andnoob-
jectionis raiscdconcernintheCoun's wrnpettnce, thequestionrai=
nodiffidcis. However, thercspoddtnt Statcmayraise whatis hown
asa prclireinarobjcction.andhcre rhe actiontakenby the Courtand
the rightsothe partiesmut bcbaland. This shouidbc done $ywhat
the Courtcallecl,inoneofitsfit cases,theadoptionof "the principle
kt ealeulatedto cnsure tbcadministrationof justice,mat suitd to
proçedurt bcforeaninternationatlnbund and mat in conformitywi&
thefundamentap i rinciptesointernationalawm.=
Two gtaerai apprmcbes wtre advatd: in the &y stageaf the
Permanent Court ofInternationalJusticeone approach rtlicdon the
Mavmmmatisprecedtn~htaee caliingforpreliminrirdecisionan tbs
objectiaa;theotherinvoked by JudgeMu, w9s infavourof sirnultaa.
..
31.EEl SET.D NO. 2.3rd pp.801ind158.
32 Sc+mpm, mt at aat S.
33.ne MivmmmatisPllertineCod001 Çuc,PCrJ ScrA.No. 2.p. 14
29tous procccdings on objectionsand rnerit~.~'The majorityadopted the
precedentof the Court as a basis, whiie lirnitiittocases broughtan
application.=
ïhe situationrernainedunchanged with the revisionof the Rules in
193 1,but rbequestionwas respened in 1936. Then, as will be recalled.
Anicle 6Lof the new Rules was introduc e d.oughout al!the succeed-
ing yearsthisquestion hasbeen onewhich has caused the Coun great
difficultiemore particularlyinview of thegreatnumber of prekiminary
objectio tnasthave beenraised."
Ithas been the practjce oftheCour to join preliminaryobjections
to themenu, which has exposed itto most serious criticism.duero the
prolongation af the case,the los5 of time and the eost involved, es-
peciallywhenthe final resultha beena decision infavour of the pre-
liminary objection,even afterlongargument on the merits.The Coun
in one case studiedseveralthousand pages of documents, and after six
yearsupheld an objection raisedat theoutset, having earlierdisposed
of otherobjections,
Sincethe matter isnot elucidatedin theStatute,and the practiceof
the Coun resultsfrom precedent and itsown decisians,ithad becorne
irnperativeto eliminateone af the sensitiveareason which theCourt
was vulnerableto criticism.More especially,irhad to be made plain
thatprelimaryobjectionsshouldbe viewed not asbeinglimitedto issues
of jurisdictiobutasalso beingapplicable trquestio nfsadrnissibility,
or other issues,which may require a clear decisionbefote the menits
of the caseare broached.It iswithin thiswider context thatthe Court
had toface the needfor a new solutionThechaice open to itla. be-
tween the totalrefusa1of anyjoinderrothe rnent~,impiying the im-
mediatedecision of preliminaryquestions,or the devisingof somemore
flexible~olution.3~
'Ihe ibeaof considering al1 preliminary questions aronce, and of
34. This proposareflcctina Dutrh.law of 1836,was supportcd by Judgcs
Weiss. Altamirand Nyholrn.
35. Thisishow M. 38of ihc1926 Rulcswas bom.
36.Btfore ihcKU iuch objcctionwere raiscd in 1outof 38 cases; 4of
thae wcrc latcrwiihdrawn andin 9casa dccisionswcre givenon preliminary
objectiononly; ionejudgmcn~ tht objectiowas joincto ihc me rit^. During
the 32 ycars othe existencof theprescnt Coun, preliminaobjcrrionshave
ken raid in 18 ouof46cases 3:ofthesewerswithdrawn and one ofthepre-
lirninaryobjectiwas withdrawn.in 14 the Coun handed down decisionï on
thepreliminaryobjcciionronlin casesihe prcliminarobjectionwtrtjoined
IOthe rncrirr.
37.Cf.E.Jiménezde Artchaga. opci?.. p.ciseq.Cf. alsG. Abi-Saab. Les
ubiecrionp&minoir@s damsfa procidurr de tu Cour inrerna~i[Prcliminary
Objectio insthe Proccdurcof the lnicrnaiioCoun] (Paris: Pcdone19671,
p.398 escq, rejecting any possibility of jointorthe ments had man! advocates
and prtsentedmany advantages. On the ocherhand, the Court could
look backat some cases in which one of thepartieshad raised a pre-
liminary objection, which the otherhad alleged to be linked to the
mena; the latter had therefore daimedthe need forjoinder and the
party raising the preliminaryobjection%hile maintainine it,did not
oppose joinder. Practicallyspeaking,~his attitude shouldhave been
viewed asconsentto thetreatment ofthe objection. nor as a pretiminary
one. buras one tobe gtven special attentionby the Court: in other
aords, as admissionthatihe objectionceased to have its orieinal pur-
p0se.W
But such a situationwas of course exceptional.The main ditficulty
anses where the partiesdo not even taci~lyagree on the statuof the
objectionIn such cases,the decision onthe procedure IO be followed
lies squarelyontheshoulders of theCourt, and itwas to instal1guide-
linesperrnittinthemostefficientresolutionof the case thatthe Rules
werealteredon thispointin 1972.The Rulethenadoptedlays down that
theCourt murt resolvethe questionof its jurisdictionbefore entering
upon the merits ofthe case.'#As to preliminaryobjections on other
grounds,the Court made itclear thatitshatl"giweits dedsion in the
form of ajudgment, bywhich ishall eithet upholdthe objectionrejecs
Ior dedare thatthe objectiondoes not possess,inthe circumstancesof
thecase,anexclusivelypreliminarycharacter".
If the lattedecisionis taken,the Courtwil1enter upontht merits
of thecase,butthis procedure shbuld na longerbe viewed as joinderof
the objectionsta themerits.It is,ifact,the disqualificarionoa "pre-
liminary"objection as not having anexdusively preliminarycharader:
itthen becomes justone of thedefençes raisedby the respondent:
This decision,rakenin 1972, was, thtre can bt no doubt, an im-
ponant step, resolvingone of tht mat compticated and critical issues
ofprocedure theCourthadhadto face throughoutits existence.Itwas
maintaincdin thefinalrevisionof theRules in 1978.40One of its ad-
vantages lies in theway it can bc expecttd to discourage the saising
O€ objectionswhich are notciearlyof a preliminarycharacter,sincethe
respondent Statewould stilbe exposedto the case kingdtalt with on
itsmerits.Whilc the varietyof objections possibleat rht preliminary
stagt cannot bt forts#n, thepracticeof the Courrhasshowncertain
38.thirwar asp&rI typeof joinder,anitirwonh recallingthrt MaHukr,
who was ntherrcluctpato sec s~id rulon joindcradrnittedii use of n
~aed or$psiai agreement beruicrnthpuriesCI. PCU Sr. b Ha 2,A&
pp. 88-89. .+.
39.New An 67 (1972)pmr. 1. 6and 7.
40.Pmious AR 67 bccomu M. 79 in the 1978RuIes. and remah un- " ,
++afterscertainingtheviews ofthepanies"decideotherwise."
x new provision hos been introduced concerning applicationsby
~nhichStatesmaypropose '-tofound thejurisdictioof theCoun upon
a consen1 thcreto?et to be given or manifestedby the State against
which such application is made". This 1sknown as an invitation to
forum prorogaium. and ithasso Earbeen appliedinsuch a way thatthe
appiicationhasbeen enteredin rheeeneral list,whicmay havecreaied
the impressionthat acase was pending while,in fact, the respondenc
Statehad not manifesredits wilcoreactand engagein the proceedings.
Kenceforth.such a casewill not "beenreredin thegeneral list norany
action be taken in the proceedingsunlessand until theState against
which such applicationis madeconsenrs ro the Coun's jurisdictionfor
thepurposesof the case".'s
In implernentatioofArticle 63.paragaph 1,of the Statutconcern-
ing the constmcrionof a convention icwhich States otherthan those
concernedin the case are parriesand theobligation imposeciby the
Statu oenotify "al1such Statesforthwith",a new Rule has becn in-
troduced:namely, that the Regisrrarwho js mentioned in Anicle 63,
paragraph1, wili act on the instrucrioofthe Coun.'' Thus,seeking
fullytoprotectthe rightof such States,theCoun has felthat inview
ofthe funhtr consequences ofsuch a notificatiothe Registrarshould
notacton hisown, butshouldreceive adequateinstmctsons.
Another provisionof interest to thepanies deals with the Coun
sittinoutsideThe Hague.This possibilitis, ofcourse, providcd for
byArticle 22of theStatute,whkhis couched in amore negativeway:
whiieestablistiinrhcscat of theCoun at The Hague, itcontinuesby
sawng that"thishowcver shallnotpreventthe Court frorn sittingand
exercisingitçfunctionselscwhere whenevtrthe Court considersitdesir-
able".Now, the new Rule on the subject relieon Article 22 of the
Statutebut givesthe panies asay inthe matter bystaring that,tefort
sodedding, the Coun:"shall ascertainthevicws O€ the panies".More-
over, itmakcs it dear that theCoun rnaydtcidc that "al1or part of
the funherprocetdingsin a caseshali6e held ata place otherthan tisc
scat of the Inun". This should conscitutean encouragement to the
4-4Air.46.para I (formerhn 45 of 1972Rdg. para.11The Ruleof 1946
providcdforquasi-identicproceduresin botb czscbrought by wiy of Ap
plifaiion by S+ Agmrnenr. Funhermore. iftheAgreement contaiasno
ruchprnvirioa.andthepda haveno; igred on the nuaibeand orderofthe
pldm tbey have ifile smemonPl andcounier-mernoriawirbinthe me
rimc-limiu.and tbCoun "sbdlnot authoriztheprucntitian ofReplia unias
itfin& tbem tobc nac~~y". Pa 2 ofAh 44 (fomtr pnr~.2 of M 45
~éoptcdin roni.
*S. Ah 38, pan S.
46.The Court &der what dirwtiooihd be Oves tatheRe&- k
ibemotier."(1~ 43). Exhibit 55
E. Jiménez de Aréchaaa, "The Amendments to the Rules of
Procedure of the ~nternitional Court of Justice, " 67 American
Journal of International Law, pp. 1, 11, and 13 (1973)American -
Journal of
International
Law
VOLUME 67
1973 bwLibrroo642Dep.State
AntericaSocietofIntenurtwnaLmu Tbehmeri- SocietofInternPtirLaw
TheAmeriam Societoffnternatid Law wu organizein1908-te foster
thsstudyofintmmticd 38w d topfOmOtethedlishment and mainte-
nmŒ of- ~elaticantbebasioflawand justiŒ--
TbeSocietserve asameeting andforumforscholars,teachers,offi-
ci& lawyersaod otherfm,m seme wre hundredMNZ~~RBJ.In Apni it
holésa tkretAaAnnua MleetininWashingow atwhi& CUrtentproblems
ofintematid Law am dbcustd The &m&y dm qmnsms regional meet-
hqg outri d eWashgtm in -n witb other hsütntions.t
questionafintama- lawand mhom are&derd in de by panels
pnd&y pups bytheSoaet) hard ofRwiew andDwelupment
W&af~para~pub~andathe~saUspicesh~90-
tionwithsnidiesspedbytkeBoard.
TheSoaetypaidîdy bus threpublications:
Tb "mcsrc ond ofI m Luw,th8leadinjd intheSeldof
ailaw, besbeerpiublishesince A spd ime of the
Iwrnolamksthe~aaddiscusPionsaftheamnialm~ab~eSociety.
TheJownalis distributcd dimmih ofthe SUQetywîthoutmiditional
daargemd isaYallSbeonon-membasata ~bscnption raof$30aywr.
1- kgd Me* a bimonthlL,a unique~tional c~iiection
ofta ofcum?nt docum- inchidhg Icgdatitreatiecourtdd-
and repotffS&&ptiae rabeareOW a y= forrnembenofthe Smiety,
$35fmdlfzs.'
Thsmdy Efmdr#erprovidememk withncwsoftheSocietyndother
~~m~s%ra.
SogctymmWp isapm tod penonsofwhatevermtiotiality and p
frrrdwha arembetatedinitobjc&ve~.Dues areregula r,5furrizsiden&
uftheUnitaStaw, 110fomm-residm~;'profession$,0,intemiediate,$15;
mdmt, $750. Appiieatiformembaship may bemadeon theform prînted
at bad otùisissuetheJmmwa BOARD OFEDITORS
-AFAu + Smrm A -
-uaie&y U-of- tn-E
mNemYorC f ~ ~ - Y& MY*
bm3HmKm S- M. !?mmm~~
rahmihliU-seb#aJLir W- D.
Mw-s Dc uhmrdk~l
Eraem
0mmpa-mpif4hw&bd JornR-EU ~ L i w ~
ÇoliiUnivcdt~kbldh NsrY& H.Y.
M4L3berty-,-
mNasYorNY.
Mmm S.McDoaüu,
Y&kw Sebml
--unkcrrtty
J-untvaritp Wben theCourtbgan therevisionofits &of pdw in1967the
the nonowedwas taattempa systematrevisiooftheRula
theiertifftYad 181jntegmtewhole. Ho~evef,in1912,heCourt
nrspendetbefd-s& andcornphtedian ithadtnitiatand Wed
md sfmpiytamendŒmh artides oftexistiRdes ofCoiut
~mong the- detemimrngthichangeof approacwas thadvice
dved fromqeriaced authwitieotthework oftheCourt. b 1970
fomerjudgesoftheCourt,former jududsh, andthos eikmatid
bver~ do had pleadedMore the Courin atlestthre easeswem
dced forW opiatonsonthrwisio aftheRule ofCourtunith the
prwisionsotheStatutaThe opinioreceiveshd a &g coinci-
&nŒ intheidenübtion ofthoseaspecof the Ruiathatrgentlse-
p- amendment, A lllajmioftheopiniok rrotivededed ar tc
thneedto:
(1) facfiiraeaarst~ Chambersofthe Gwrt d conŒde tathe
partlsume id- fathe wmpition ofad Chambersconstfftrted
da Artble paragmph2,oftheStatutq
(2) aeeeierendsimplifbath.ontenthusaadad- pdg
snderetcise~~1ovetd
(3)mgdab ltdimbrf OI3feetiW"";ttlt tkl. Y lm. L(fa-
siblesndadthsddayanderpffisefwohndiaadoubiedjseussiwofths
samtqu~atMh@~~jtaged&~tagedthemd~
Als n 1870theGd Ably oftheUnitedN- in- Member
S~andStatespsrtiesfotbsStatatttosabmftviewsdsaggestioru
am~tberoIsoftbeCoartonthsl3iasisofaqoestioanaireprepared
bytheSccdqUa Whiletbrepliesofgowmmentsaiwreda
moeh.wida~~~taftb4mfuof~~sevcraid&em,~
~~the@unsand~ofddtbeCoirrt,~
ammkdrim;lar~çinths&iadIdtnpb.
Ith-mbledytheCourtdeQdadinfmtomiM
~~mattaofpn*onths~~ddmtaf~
'~cud~Rul#only,wWoatpRjodiŒb~~witbitrrnmi-
pachenrtvs&ofrwiPfonatammcIeismelypaoe.
ftmortbsltcalledthat~~Rulcr~th~&teder-
~dgfiyye~rsof~tfonofo~th~~j~dd
Thir~of~~aotbe~~yandtodo m
v
~ossdto~teintbsR~dCoiat~haPdlingofpnlimmary
objaetfozisiammczpsdltmuPndzpümnlwaywpsonedtbemUst
ospaePtrsoommendaticmJdinthtvPriortsdegsnd-Mes
#mcanfagthsfm~~afths~pnd~af~of:the
CorPtTbsrcisr@feeljngthatpart@me~.-b'prtbey
hvsdereiopedin~t~~~~bliltbaftheyb~edtd
~dtlay~,~af~~of~arpmmts~and~
dktsiam It~tbdtrJisdthntinmoneasc~tbancme~ban&g
-abi~~~0n3bardttdf0see~pendi~paoftrme,~~nd
~far*the$bemirkfa&odoPbfe~ofthesamc~é~~
kh~orrrt. Tbstwomos~im~ammdmem~thathavtbeenhtm
-fnthbUmtcrtarc: (f)*d. - tlwqfthejddietionoftbe
C~~tbap&mharJ'stageafthecaseand(ii) theeliminntianofthe
authkatfan intheRdcp toj& apmhinary objacatto the
A~pPri#wofthe~~umocrafthep~rpd~M
~01&mbfsetisahdbslonr,iswtïlispn~raminitirni0f~t
* of Pdhmq objeeawt and ootha pmdurai of the
m. Thir~ogtbeLn~af~ripon~~a~
timattb~skugeoftbsproeeedfngs. Tbs~~bas
giSsaiktha~for~o~~!~~istiratwima
tfmaaprracalPrlyfn~t0~~'to~acaptaocsuf~j~-
dico~tlof~Comt,~d~bbpndfmportantlegaîqu~me
dthatha~mta~~towimsdthafssue~mthemeritsaf
theaaae.
The~erfa~dtothisMcultyinthe~haabeentojoinsucha
~pbïmqj hjectim to the dt3. Thus,in theRi@ of P-ge ooer
Indh Temtory* cas%theChut johedtothe meritj th~eoondprelimi-
mxy objscti4n by Indiatotb dkt thst thedisputehadoriginated 19731 mm ~vrssOF PROCS~VRE.OF LCJ. 13
date whichhad beenbd asa time-linut the resema-
M~~~
,, tmponr made by India to itdbtiion reeopizingcorn-
p&ory jmdktiD11
~h~ new parappb 6 isintendedtoprovidea diErnensoIutioto the
sdties bat intbe pet havecompeUedtheCourt tojob to thmerita
p- objectiorn-g itsjvrirdictloInthe presenrrofS&
an objdan, Cm insteadofbringinginthewholeof the meritby
ofa joiddawould,amhg topmlpaph 6,regue tbeprü~ to
e atthe prem stagethose~uMo~~s, thos tou&g upoli
a%im&B, whichbear an thejurisdictkdissue.Thus, therewodd no
a idcation for leaviainsuspue or forpostponina d&-
longer
sh on queptimoftheCourt'sownjurisdiction.
~d~ittedlya Ucultr remaia sitbregardto onep* objeetim
,&bg tajurisdietien-texceptionof domesticjutisdietwhi& -
jded to themeritinthe ofP-ge esse.ne inmtion bya
Statofitrdomestic~uisdictioisquivalentto itsayingthatitbasno
intenratid obliga- M3d-Vi4the~laim atte.tThus ,hen theque
tienof domestifiction irraise asa pdhhry objectioeotonlya
partbutthewhateofthemeriti4brou& ipb mn~iderati00.
neffeptiooofdomestijurisdicümisobvia&anwelitfoundedtherewill
be noWdty fa theCoiirt in upholdingthe objectsincin& a
bypathesithe mdmt State,having noobligatiutom& tbe o&er
party,isthe f01%judge'and, aceordinto theternuofArticleZ,psra.
-ph 7, otbsUN* met, L notrcqalled"tosuut such miters to
#tttmui~' Butif,a~ofta happ- the objectiwdoesnota- atttie
-sta~etoLoboiisty dhded, therearewaystonjectthe
0h-m &t preiudgingthema spht the-dent
TbisIs-mb*basbandds~thaprimafacienr
piovisioocondusion asto thelegaititldi4 upon bythe appu-t,
The aart, aiitdidin theIntffhckI me, dw not attemptatthe pre
~sb~mtoarsessthevalldiQof thegroimd~~k&~Ltog~pn
wm bt-tiOnU bt it mdy ooasid wenetherthe~ d p
iudd bythe apphnt "me suchas tojustiftheprovisioncondlltrrm
thattbeymaybeofdwsace'fntheepse.~ Exhibit 56
G. Guyomar, Commentaire du Règlement de la Cour Internationale de
~usti-~nterprétation et Pratique, p, 371 (1972) PUBUCDtREVE~HEEROHIERNAALllC
NOUVEL-E20RIE
GEKEVIEGUYOMAH
uI)WDROIT
CttrunrcictrimrtguiL
COMME DAUR E GR E EMENT
COU INTERNAT D EOUNSATLICEE
INTERPRfETTATIOTIQUE
OuupuUUlconcdCentre NdionaI
dIa ReScit~ti/ique nnircsoit prcscntceauïnl l'expiratiodu délai fixpour II prrmirre
pifccdc ~irocçdurcccrite i dcposcr par 11Purtic qiiisouls%cI'escep
lion: pour le difendeur. eetit pibec estle cuntre-mrtnoirc. pour Ic
demiidcur, II s'agitdu memoire. 3Iiiis cet aiinkaentcrinc ninii In
praiiqttt suivic par Cour dans I'aEairrde I'Ormonrtnirc. et recoa-
tirilormelirniuif la vssililitcpur une Partie sutte que le deltn-
deuï de rouiever. Lecas echinnt. Jcs rxctptiuns prclirnisoirtsEii-
inni. d'autre plirt d'utiliser i'rxprcrmCme d'atscepiian prllimi-
nnirtW. il esth remarquer que I'rtinca 1 emploie ln formule une
4escepiion sur lnq~cllc le dCfendcur[ou toute autre Partie] demande
une decision ai'unque la ptoeedure suric fond ie poursuive i. L'aii-
nia 1 pritise enlin. que I'exceptidoii *ire prtseniit par écrit.
A I'aIinéa2. les mots sous forme de copie ont etc ajouiCs au
mrmbrt de phrase *Ic hrdcrenu dcs pikts i L'appui.qui sont an-
ncxns *.
Les alincos 5et4 demeurent sons modiAcntirin. Lei nlincna 5et 6
en revanche. aont entiercuitnt nouvcpuL L'aiinta 5 insiste surIn
nhsritÉ de limiter,P ceahde de 1a procCdw~i1'srgumentPtion aux
pmts a nt tmit à I'emptb, en nie d'tvitercorifunionet pcrtldc
temp~ lnn e 6 remamde O IP Cour le dmil ù'inmîer In PWes
P dtbnttrt tout wint de kit ou de droit.ef I nmduue but mwen 11
itndt p~ilimhin de 28 praduit. ~n&t semble donc mb sur la
aicessite de stniua sur la #impCttuce avant d'entamer l'examen de
I'mUairtau fond : e'eit IPun tltment nwwau et miiembàablement Il
tmpwlrnt
Colinta 7. eorrnpondmt h ramcien ilinh 5 de I'.rliclt 82 du
RbgIement de 1918.a CtCprofend&ueni narsnii. L'aiiih 7 prkisc
en dïct contraimment P I'incim ilinti 6.que Li Cou i8alue dom
unarrdt. C#i rnttrint .Inptitiqot suiviejuwyii'ki pnrPuCU. (51).Ii
faut soulier rPaa que i'erprsssmn ret Iijoht ai fond m. nt mm-
ph& par taformule * ou dkhe que tttk e=EEptbn m'apu dini 1-
circomtancu de S'es* un cuicttrt trclusivtrneut prüIai;aiiri.
It ne s'agitmtmiiicmeatpi 1Pbuuc dmtba pnrement me-
tiopncllt.Cepdnnt. cm L'nbwnΠde toaie indicationotfieidlemln-
tliz au but eflectipemtnt pwtluivi pu la Cour. en I'absem~iurtoat
de toute pratique et dt teuit jurispr~dcnca auieoptjbit d'écbkw la
portde ricllc de et remiaicmrnt. iocunc btcrprCt8tiOm valabIr ne
uuriit &ire pmpoKe &ni I'immidhî.
L'niiaém 8 de l'utielt 67 du Rbglemtut de 1972 ni eatitnmmi
nouvuu. 11entérint In pratique sui* juigu'iri pu 1iCon?. en prb
-nt qu'&et zcri dom& I tout aoewd intcmmu enire In Partin.
et tendnnt Q te que I'ereepticnroulev& ea wr(u de I'alinb 1. soit
traaebtr tom de I'a.mm au Ioad (59). OEPARTMENtOF m
DIVISION OF LANGUAGESERVICES
(TRANSLAl7ON)
LS NO.
134258
JF
French
Faragraph 6 acknowledges the Court's right to invite the
Parties to debate any point of fact or law, and to produce any
cvidence relating fo the issue of the Court's jurisdiction. in
order to allw the Court to rule on this point in the
prcliminary stage of the procedure. In this way, the empha$is
appears to be placed on the need to rule on the matter of
jurisdiction prior to undertaking an examinarion of the case on
its mesitç. This is a new and seemingly very important element Exhibit 51
Resolution 827, United Nations Security Council,
3217th meeting, 25 May 1993
(United NationsDocument S/RES/827) RI~M~CE corn
BY HAND TO:
UNITED IO:REFERENCE DOCS
NATIONS Rïd 3428 STATE DaT
Security Council
s/RES/827 (1993)
25 May 1993
AdoPted by the Securitv Council at its 3217th meetins. an
25 Nav 1993
The securitv Couneil,
Reaffiminq its resolution 713 (1991) of 25 septder 1991 and al1
subsequent relevant resolutions,
Havins considexed the report of the Secretary-General (5/25704 and Add.1)
purmant to paragraph 2 of resolution 808 (1993),
#
Expressina once aaain its grave alarm at continuing reporte of widespread
and flagrant: violations of international humanitarianlaw occurring within the
territory of the former Yugoalavia, and eepecially in the Republîc of Borrriiia and
Herzegovina, Lneluding reporta of maes killinge, maeeive, organized and
systmatic detention and rape of women, and the continuance of the practice of
"ethnic eleanaing", includingfor the acquisition and the holding of territory,
betermininqthat this situation continues ta constitute a threat te
internationalpeaee and security,
L
DetermFned to put an end to such crimes and to take effective meaeurea to
bring te justice the persons who are reepunsible for them,
Convinced that in the paftfcular clrcumstancee of the former Yugoslavia the
establishment aa an ad hoc meaeure by the Couneil of an international tribunal
and the prosecution of peraone reeponsible for serious violatione of
international humanitarianlaw would enable this ah to be achieved and would
contribute to the sestoration and maintenance of peace,
Believinqthat the establishmentof an international tribunal and the
prosecution of pereons responsiblefor the above-mentioned violations of
international humanitarian law will contribute to ensuring that such violations
are halted and effeetively redreaeed,
Notinq in thie regard the recomroendation by the Co-Chairmen of the Steering
Cornittee of the International Conference on the Former Yugoalavia for the
establishment of such a tribunal (5/25221),
93-30628 (E) 250593S/RES/827 (1993)
Page 2
Reaffirminq in this regard ita decision in resolution 808 (1993) that an
international tribunal shall be establiahed for the prosecution of persons
responsible for serious violations of internotional humanitarian law comitted
in the territory of the former Yugoalavia aince 1991,
Considecinq that, pending the appointment of the Proeecutor of the
International Tribunal, the Commiseion of Experts established pursuant to
reeolution 780 (1992) ehould continue on an urgent basis the collection of
information selating to evidence of grave breachea of the Geneva Conventione and
other violations of international humanitarian law ae propoeed in its interim
report (S/25274),
Aetinq undes chapter VI1 of the charter of the United Nations,
3. Approvea the report of the Secretary-General;
2. Deeides hereby to establish an international tribunal for the eole
purpose of proaecutingpersona responeible for eerioue violations of
international humanitarian law corrimittedin the territory of the fonner
Yuguslavia between 1 January 1991 and a date to be determined by the Çecurity
Council upon the restoration of Face and to thie end to adopt the Statute of
the International Tribunal annexed to the above-mentionedreport;
3. Remesta the Secretary-General to submit to the judgea of the
InternationalTribunal, upon their election, any suggeetiona received from
Statee for the rulem of procedure and evidence calked for in Article 15 of the
Statute of the International Tribunal;
4. Deeides that al1 States shall eooperate fully with the International
Tribunal and its organe in accordance with the preeent reaolution and the
Statute of the International Tribunal and that consequently al1 States hall
take any meaaures necessary undes their domestic law to implement the provisions
of the preeent reaolution and the Statuts, including the obligation of States to
comply with requesta for assistance Qr orders issued by a Trial Chamber under
Article 29 of the Statute;
S., Vraes Çtatea and intergovermental and non-govermental organkzations
to contribute funda, equipment and services to the International Tribunal,
including the offer of expert personnel;
6. Deeidea that the determinatian of the seat ef the International
Tribunal ie subjeet to the conclusionof appropriate arrangements between the
United Nations and the Netherlands acceptable to the Council, and that the
International Tribunal may sit elsewherewhen it considers it neeeesary for the
efficient exerciae of ite functions:
7. Decidee al80 that the work of the International Tribunal ahall be
carried out withoot prejudiee to the right of the victims to seek, through
appropriatemeans, compensation for damages incurred ae a reeult of violations
of lnternational humanitarian law;
8. Resueata the Secretaq4Zeneral to implement urgently the present
resolution and in particular to make pcactical arrangements for the effective s/R~S/827 (1993)
Page 3
functioning of the International Tribunal at the earliest time and to report
periodically to the Council;
9. Decidee to remain actively seized of the matter. Exhibit 58
Resolution 955, United Nations Security Council,
3453rd meeting, 8 Navember 1994
(United Nations Document S/RES/955) Security Council
Distr. '
GENERAZ
S/RES/955 (1994)
8 November 1994
Adopteri$Y the Securitv Couneil at its 3453rd meetknq,
on 0 November 1994
The Securitv CounciT,
Reaffirminq al1 its previaus resolutions on the situation in Rwanda,
Havins.considered the reports of the Seeretary-General pursuant to
paragraph 3 of resolution 935 (1994) of I July 1994 (Ç/1994/879 and S/1994/906),
and havins taken note of the reports of the Sptcial Rapporteurfor Rwanda of the
United Nations Connaissionon Human Rights (S/1994/1157, annex I and annex III,
Expressinq amreeiation for the work of the Codasi- of Experts
establishedpursuaat.to resolution 935 (19941, in particular its preliminary
report on violations of internationalhumanitaria law in Rwanda transmitted by
the Sesretary-Genera18s letterof 1 0ctober 1994 /5/1994/1125),
Emressin~ once auain its grave concern ae the reporta indicating that
geaocide and other systewtic, widespread and flagrant violationsof
international humanitarian law'havebeen eodtted in Ruanda,
Detezaninlnq that thia situation continues to eonatitute a threat to
international peace and security,
,Determined to put an end to such crimes and to take effectivemeasures to
bring to justice the persuns who are responsible for them,
Convinced that in the particular circvmstances of Rwanda, tfieproaecution
of persons responsible for serious violations of international humanitarian law
would enable thia aim to be aehieved and muld contribute to the process of
national reconeiliation and to the restoration and maintenance of peaee,
-
Reissuedfor technical reasons.
95-14097 (E)
IBIUuIiu ma irnIIBaIIIniis/RES/955 (1994)
Page 2
Believinq that the establishmentof an internationaltribunal for the
prosecution of persons respansible for geaocide and the other above-rnentioned
violatiens of international humanitarian law will contribute to ensuring that
çuch violations are halted and effectively redreççed,
Stressinq alse the need for internationalcooperation to strengthen the
courts and judicial system of Rwanda,having regard in particukar to the
necessity for those courts to deal with large numbers of suspects,
Considerinq that. the Commission.ofExperts establishedpursuant to
resolution 935 (1994) should continue on an urgent basis the collectionof
information relating to evidence of grave violationsof international
humanitarian law comitted' in the territory of Rwanda and should submit its
final report to the Secretary-General by 30 November 1994,
Actinq under Chapter VI1 of the Charterof the United Nations,
1. Decides hereby,having received the sequest of the Government of
Rwanda 1S~1994/1115), to establish an international tribwal for the sole
purpose of proçecuting person$ responsiblé'for.genoeid end other sericius
violationsof internationalhumanitarian law comitted in the territory of
Rwanda an$ Rwandan citizens responsible for genocide a6d other such violations
comitted in the territozy of neighbouring rat es,between 1 January J994 and
31 ~ecember 1994 &d,to this end ta adopt th. ,tatute .he. International
o--
Criminal ~ribunilfor Rwanda annexed hereto; '
2. Decides th& al1 States shall coopérate fully with the International
Tribunal and itç organs in accordancewith the present resolution =d'.the
Statute of thesInternational Tribunal aridthat con6equently al1 States sbàll
take any measures necessaryunder their domestic law to irrrplement: the provisions
of the present resolution and the Statute, including the obligation of States to
comply with requestç for assistance or orders iasued by a Trial Chamber undes
Article 28 of the Statute. and reuuests tate te'o keep..the Secxetary-General
. .
inforrr>dof such measYres ;
3. Considers that the ~cvernment.ofRwanda shotildbe notified prior to
the taking of decisions under articles 26 and 27 of the Statute;
4. urnes States and intergove&hental and non-gavemental organizationç
to contribute funds, equipment and servicesto the International Triburial,
lncluding the offr, of expert personnel;
5. Requests the Secretary-General to implement this resolution urgently
I
and in particdar to make practical arrangements for the effective functlcrning
of the International Tribunal, including rec-endations to the Council as to
possible locations for the seat of the International Tribunal at the eaxliest I
time and to report pericdically to the Counsil;
6. Decides that the seat of the InternationalTribunal shakl be
determined by the CounciL having regard to considerations of justice and 1
falrness as well as administrative efficiency,including access to wirnesses,
and economy, and subject to the conclusionof appropriate arrangementsbetween
/. .. 1 sfRES/955 (1394)
Page 3
the United Nations and the State of the seat, acceptable to the Council, having
regard to the fact that the International Tribunal rnay meet away from its seat
when it eonsiderç it necessary for the efficient exercise of its functions; and
decides chat an office will be established and praceedingç will be conducted in
Rwanda, where feasible and appropriate, çubject to the conclusion of similar
appropriate arrangements;
7. Decides to consider increasing the nder of judges and Trial Chambers
of the International Tribunal if it becomes necessary;
B. Decides to remin actively seized of the rriatter.
Statute of the International Tribunal for Rwanda
Having been established by the Securîty Council acting'uriderChapter VI1 of
the Charter of the United Nations. the International Criminal Tribunal for the
Prosecution of Perçons ~esponsibie for Genocide and Other Seriouç Violations of
International HumanitarianLaw Codtted in the Territory of Rwanda an6 Rwandan
citizens responsible for genocide and other sueb violations comitted in the
territory of neighbouring States, between 1 January 1994 and 31 Deeember 1994
(hereinafterreferred to as "the International Tribunal for Rwandan)shall
function in accordance with the provisionsof the present Statute.
Article 1
cornetence-of the International Tribunal for Rwanda >.
The International Tribunal for Rwanda shall have the power to prosecute
perçons responsible for serious violations of international humanitarian law
committed in the territory of Rwanda and Rwanüan citizens responsible for çuch
violations committed in the territory of neighbouring States, between
1 San- 1994 and 31 Becember 1994, in accordance with the provisions of the
present Statute.
Artiele 2
Genocide
1. The InternationalTribunal for Rwanda shall have the power to
prosecute persons comitting genocide as defined in paragraph 2 of this article
or of committing any of the other aets enumerated in paragraph 3 of this
article.
2. Genocide meanç any of the following aets committed with intent to
destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group.
as çuch:S/ILES/955 (1994)
Page 4
{a) Killing members of the group;
(b) causing serieus bodily or mental ham to menbars of the grq;
Delibcratelyinflictingon the graup conditions of life calculated to
{cl
brin3 about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
(d) Imposingmeasuresintendedto prevuit birch. within the gmup;
(e) Porcibly tramferring children of the group ta another group.
3. Ihe following acts skll be punishable:
(a) Genocide;
(b) Conapiracyto cornmit genocide;
(c) Direct ana public incitementto commit genocide;
(dl Atteqt: to codt genocide;
(e) cmplicity in genocide.
A .
Article 3
Crimes against humanitv
The ~nternational Tribunalfor Rwanda shall have the pover ta proseiute
person8 responsiblefor the follovingcramas when comnitted as part of a
wideapreador systematic attack againet any civilian population on national.
political, ethnic. racialor religious grwmds:
-
(a) Murder;
(c) enslavemen t
(d) Deportation;
(el Imprisonmea t
(£1 Torture;
tg) Rape: :
(h) Persecueionson political, racial and raligious grounds;
(i) Other inbumane acts. s/RES/955 (1994)
Page 5
Article 4
Violations of Article 3 cornmon to the Geneva
Conventionsand of Additional Protacol II
The InternationalTribunal for Rwanda shall have the power to prosecute
persons committing or ordering to be eanunitted aerioasviolationsof
Article 3 eorranon to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949 for the Protection
of War Yictims, and of Additional Protacol II thereto of 8 June 1977. These
violations shall include,but shall not be limiredto:
(ai Violence tcrllfe, health and physical or mental well-beingof persons,
in particular murder as well as cruel treatment such as torture, mutilation or
any form of corparal punishment;
Ib) Collective punishmenta ;
(cl Taking of hostages;
(dl Acts of terrorism;
(el Outrages upon personal dignity, in particular humiliatingand
degrading treatment, rape, anforced prostitution and any fonn of indecent'
assault ;
f Pillage ;'
g The passing of sentences and the earryingout of exetutionswithout
previous judgement pronounced by a regularly constitutedcourt, affording al1
the judieial guaranteeswhieh are recognizedas indispensableby civilized
peoples ;
(hl Threats te commlt any of the foregoing acts.
., .
I , . Article 5
The International Tribunal for Rwanda shall have juriadictian mer natural
perçons pursuant to the provisionsok the preeent Statute.
Article 6
1. A person who planned, instigated, ordered, eorrünitted or otbemise
aided and abetted in the planning, preparation or exeeutforr of a crimereferred
t0 in articles 2 to 4 of the present Statute, shall be individually responsible
for the crime.s/REs/~~~ (1394)
Page 6
2. The officia1 position of any accused person, whether as Head of State
or Gdvernment or as a responsibleGovernment official, çhall not relieve sueh
person of criminal respunsibility nor mitigate puniçhment.
3. The fact that any of the acts referred ta in articles 2 to 4 of the
present Statute was conrmitted by a subordinate does nat relieve hiç or her
superior of criminal responsibllity if he or she knew or had reason tu know that
the subordinate ,wasabout to commit such acts or had done so and the superior
failed to-take tbe,necessar)l and reasonable meaaures lo prevent such acts or ta
punish the perpetrators thereof .
4. The faet tbat an accused person acted pursuant to an order of a
~ove&ient: or of.a çuperior shalb not relieve him or her of criminal
responsibility,but may be considered in mitigaticln of punishment if the
InternationalTribunal for Rwanda determines that justice so requires.
Article 7
Territorial and temoral iurisdiction
The territorial jurisdicticnof the InternationalTribunal for Rwanda shall
extend to the territory of Rwanda including its land surface and airspace as
well as ta the territory of neighbouring States in respect of serious violations
of internationalhumanitarianlaw comitted by Ruandan citizens. The temporal
jurisdiction of the InternationalTribunal for Rwanda shaL1 extend to a period
begiming on 1 Januasy 1994 and ending on 31 December 1994.
L.
. ,
concurrent iurisdiction
1. The InternationalTribwial for Rwanda and national courts shall have
concurrent jurisdictiunto proçecute persons for seriaus violations of
internatirna1humanitarian law commicred in the territory of Rwanda and Rwanda
citirens for such violations comitted in the territory of neighbouring States,
between I January 1994 and 31 aecember 1994,
2. The InternationalTribunal for Rwanda shall have primacy over the
natiinal courts of al1 States. At any 'stage of the procedure, the International
courts to defer to its
Tribunal for Rwanda may fom~ally request national
coqetence in accordancewirh the present Statute and the Rules of Procedure and
Evidence of the International Tribunal for Rwanda. S/RES/955 El9941
Page 7
Article 9
Non bis in idem
No person shall be rxied before a national court for acts conçtituting
1.
sérious violationsof internationalhumanitarianlaw under the present Statute,
for which he or she tzas already been tried by the International Tribunal for
Rwanda.
-..
2. A person who has been tried by a national court for acts constituting
serious violations of internationalhumanitarianlaw may be subsequently tried
-
by the InternationalTribunal for Rwanda only if:
. ..
(al The act for which he or she was tried was characterized as an ordinary
crime; or
I <~
(b) The national court proceedings were not impartial or independent, were
designed to shield the accused from internationalcriminal responsibility,or
the case was noc dilig-ntly -r-secuted;
. -
3. In considering the penalty to be imposed on a person eonvicted of a
crime under the preaent Statute, the InternationalTribunal for Rwanda shall
take into account the extent to which any penalty impose& by a national court on
the same person for' the samé act has",8lready been serveci,. : . .
m z.
Article 10.
Orcranization of the InternationalTribunal.bor.Rwanda
The InternationalTribunal for Rwanda shall consist of the following
l organs :
.-
(a) The Chambers, comprising two Trial Chambers and an Appeals Chamber;
-
(b) The Prosecutor; nnd
(CI A Registry.
Article 11
.-
Comosition of the Chambers
The Chambers shall ba composed.6f eleven independent judges, no twa of whom
may be nationals of the same State, who shall serve as follows:
Three judges shall serve in each of the Trial Chambers;
la)
1 (bl Pive judges shall serve in the bppeals Chamber. '
1 S/RES/SSS (19943
Page 8
Article 12
Qualificationand election QE iudaes
1. The judges shall be person3 of high moral characcer, impartialicyand
integrity who pasBass Ehe qualificationsrequired in their respective auuntries
for appointmentto the highest judicial offices. In the .averallcompositionof
the Chambers due account shall h taken of the experience of the judges in
criminallaw, internationallaw, including internationalhumanitarian law and
human rights law.
2. The membera of the Appeale chamber of the InternationalTribunalfor
the Prosecutionof Peraons Responsible for Serious Violations of ~nteniational
Humanirarian Law Conaitted in the Territory of the FornierYugoslavia since 1991
(horeinafter referred to as "the Intematianal Tribunal for the Former
YugoslaviaU) shali alsa serve as the members of the Appeals Chamber of the
InternationalTribunal for Rwanda.
3. The judges of the Trial Chambers of the Internatio~l Tribunal for
Rwanda shall be elected by the General Assembly frum a liet submitred by the
SecurityCouacil, in the fallowingmamer:
(a) The secretaq-Geaeralshall'invite naminationsfor judges of 'the Trial
Chambers from States Membersof the United Natioxm and non-member States
maintainingpermanent'observer missions at United NationsHeadquarters;
tb) within ehirty days of the &te of the invitation of the Seeretary-
Genêral,each State may naminate up to two candidates meeting the qualifications
set out in paragraph 1 above, no two of wham shall be of the .samenationality
and neither of whom shall be of the oame nationalityas any judge on the Appeals
Chamber ;
(cl The Secretary-General shall forward the nominations received tO the
Security Couneil. Fram the nominatione received the Security Couacil shall
eatablish a list of not leas than twelve and not more than eighteen candidates,
taking due account 0f adequate representatkanon the InternationalTribunal for
Rwanda of the principal legal system of the world;
I
(dl The President of the Security Council ahall transmit the list of
candidates to the President of the General Assembly. From that list the General
Asaembly shall eleet the six judgea of the Trial Chambers. The candidates who
receive an absolute majority a£ the votes of the States Membersof the mired
Nations and of the non-Meer States maintaiaing permanent observermissions at
Wnited NationsHeadquarters, shall be declared elected. Should two candidates
of the same naticaalityobtain the required majority vote, the one whci received
the higher number of votes shall be coasidered elected.
4. fn the event of a vacancy in the Trial Chambers, after consultation
with the Presidentaof the Security Couneil and a£ the General Assembly, the
Secretary-General 8-11 appaint a persan meeting the qualifications of
paragraph 1 hve, for the remainder of the tenu af office concerned. Ç/RES/9SS (19941
Page 9
5. The judges of the Trial Chambers shall be elecred for a tenn of four
years. The terms and conditions of service shall be those of the judges of the
InternationalTribunal for the Former Yugoslavia. They shall be eligible for
re-election.
Article 13
Offieers and rnembers of the Chambers
1. The judges of the International Tribunal for Rwanda shall elect a
Presdent.
.. -
2. Mter consultation with the judges of the InternationalTribunal for
Rwanda, the ~reçident çhall asçign the ,judges to the Trial Chambers. A judge
shall sertjeonly,in the Ckamber ta which he or rhe was assigned.
'3. .The jùdgés"of eaeh Trial Chamber' shall elect a PresidingJudge, who
shail e&auet al1 of the proceedingsof that Trial Chambtr as a whole.
,.
Article 14
Rules of ~roeedure and evidence
The judgea of the InternationalTribunal for Rwanda shall adopt, for the
purpose af procecdingis before the InternationalTribunal for Rwanda, the rules
of procedure and evkdence foi. the conduct of the pre-trial phase of the
proceedings ,.trials-.and- appcals ,,the admission of evldenee,ehe protection of
victims and witnessês a& othes appropriate matters of the International
Tribunal for the' Former Yugoslavia with such changes as they detm necessary.
2-
Article 15
' The ~ro&tor
1. The Prosecutor shall be responsible for the investigation and
proaeeution of persops responsible for eerious violationsof international
humanitariad law comûtted in the territory of Rwanda and Rwandan citizens
sesponsibl~..for.suc violations eomitted in the territory of neighbouring
States, between 1 January 1994-and 31 December 1994.
. .-...
2. The ~rosktor shall aet independently as a separate organ of the
International Tribunal for Rwanda. He or she shall not seek br receive
inatnictions.fro? any Governmentor from any other source,
. .
3. The ~roae-mtor of the InternationalTribunal for the Former Yugoslavia
shall also serve as the Prosecutor of the International Tribunal for Rwanda. Be
or she sbll have additional staff, including an additional Deputy Prasecutor,
to assist with prosecutionsbefore the InternationalTribunal for Rwanda. Such~/REs/955 (1994)
Page 10
staff shall be appointed by the Secrerary-General on the recommendation of the
Prosecutor.
Article 16 ,
The Resistq
1. The Registry shall be responsible for the administrationand servicing
of the International Trihmal for Rwanda.
2. The Registry shall consist of a Regiserar and sueh other staff as may
be requkred.
3. The Registrar shall be appointed by the Secrelary-General after
consultationwith the President of the International Tribunal for Rwanda. He or
she shalk serve for a four-year tenn and be eligible for reappointment. The
tem and conditions of service of the Registrar shall be those of an Assistant
Secretary-General of the United Nations.
4. The staff of the Registry sbll be appaintedby the Secretary-General
on the recommendatibn of the Registrar.
Article 17
fnvestisation and or&aration of indietment
1. The Prosecutor shall initiate investigations ex-offieioor on the
basiç of information obtained from any saurce, pastkcularly frgrn Governments,
United Nations organs, inrergove-ntal and non-governmeatal organizations.
The Prosecutor shall assess the information received or obtained and decide
whether there is sufficient basis to proceed.
2. The Prosecutor shall have the power to question suspects, victimg and
witnesses, Co collect evidence and to conduct on-site investigations. In
carrying out these tasks, the Prosecutor may, as appropriate, aeek the
assistance of the State authoritkesconcerned.
3. If questioned, the suspect shll be entitled to be assisted by counsel
of his or her own choice, ineluàingthe right to have legal assistance assigned
to the suspect without payment by him or her in ariysuch case if he or she does
not have auificient rnectnsto pay for it, as weli as ta necessary tmnSlati08I
into and £rom a language he or she speaks and underatands.
4. Upon a determination that a prima faeie case exista, the Prosecutor
shall prepare an indietment eontaining a concise statement of the facts and the
crime or crime's with whieh the accused is charged under the Statute. The
indietment shall be transrnitted to a judge of the Trial Chamber. S/RES/955 (19945 l
Page II 1
Article 18
Review of the indictment
1. The judge of the Trial Chamber to whom the indictment haç been
transmitted shall review it. If satisfied that a prima facie case has been
established by the Prosecutor, he or she shall eonfirm the indictment. If not
ço satisfied, the indictment shall be dismissed.
I
2. Upon confirmation of an indictment,the judge may, at the request of
the Prosecutor, issue sueh orders and warrants for the arrest, detention,
surrender or transfer of persons, and any other orders as may be required for
the conduct of the trial.
..
Article 19
Commencement and conduct of trial proceedinqs
1. The Trial Chambers shaL1 ensure that a trial is fair and expeditious
and that proceedingsare conducted in accordancewith the rules of procedure and
evidenee, with full respect-for the rights of'ehe accused and due regard for the
protection of victirns and witnesses.
2. A person against whom an indictmenthas been confirmed shall, pursuant
to an order or an arrest warrant of the InternationalTribunal for Rwanda, be
taken inro custody, immediately informed of the charges against him or her and
transferrcd,to the'Internationa1Tribunal for Rwanda. ,
3. The Trial Chamber shall read the indietment,satisfy itçelf tkat the
rights of the accused are respected, confirm that the aceused understands the
indictment, and instruet the aceused to enter a plea, The Trial Chamber shall
then set the date for trial.
,
4. The hearings shall be public unless th-= Trlal Chamber decides to close
the proceedingç in accordance with its rules of procedure and evidence.
.- . .
Article 20
Rishts of the aceused
1. ALI persons shall be equal befoxe the International Tribunal for
Rwanda.
2. In the detemination of charges against him or her, the accused shall
be entitled ta a fair and publie hearing, subject to article 21 of the Statute.
3. The aceused shall be presumed innocent until proved gullty according
to the provisions'of the present Statute.s/RES/955 (1994
Page 12
4. In the determination of any charge against the accused pursuant to the
present Statute, the aceused shall be entitled to the fallowing minimum
guarantees, in full equality:
(a) Ta be informed promptly and in detail in a laquage which he or she
understands of the nature and cause of the charge against him or her;
(b) To have adequate tirne and Eacilities for the preparation of his or her
defence and ro eonmnrnicate with counsel of.his or her oun choosing;
(el To be tried without uridue delay;
.,
(dl To be tried in his or her presence, and to defend himelf or herself
in person or through legal assistance of his or her awrichoosing; to be
informed, if he or she daes not have legal assistance, of this right; and to
have legal assistance assigned ta him or her, in any case where the interests of
justice so require, and without papent by him or her in any sucb case if he or
she does not have sufficieat means to pay for it;
(el To examine,or have examinea, -the witnesses against hlm or her and to
obtain the attendance and examinationof witnesses on his or her behalf under
the oame conditionsas witnessesagainst him or her;
(fl To have the free assistance of an.interpreter if he or ahe cannot
understand or speak the languageused in the -International Tsikninal for Rwanda;
-. .--
Ig) Not to be compelled to testify against himçelf or herself or to
confess guilt .
. -.
. .. Article 21
Protection of vietims and witnesses
The-Interriational-.Tribunf or Rwanda.shall provide in its des of .
procedure and evidence for the protectian of victims and witnesses. Çuch
protection measures ahall include, but ahal1 not be lîmited to, the conduct of
in camera proceedlngs and the protection of the victim's identity.
1. The Trial Chambers shall pronounee judgementsand impose sentences and
penalties on pexaons convicted of serious violations of international
-
humanitaxian law.
2. The judgement ahall be rendered by a majority of the judges of the
Trlal Chamber, and shall be delîvesed by the Trial Chamber in public. It shall
be accompanied by a reasoned opinion in writing, to which separate or dissentkng
opiniona may be appended. S/REÇ/~SS 11994)
Page 13
Article 23
Penal tles
1. The penalty imposed by the Trial Chamber shall be Iimited to
imprisonment. In determining the lem of imprisonment, the' Trial Chambers
shall have recourse to the general practiee regarding prison sentences in the
courts of Rwanda.
2. In imposing the sentences, the Trial Chambers should take inta account
such factors as the gravity of the offence and the individual cirçurastarices of
the eonvietedperson.
3. In addition to imprisonrnent, the Trial Chambers may order the return
I of any property and proceedç aequired by criminal conduct, including bylmeans af
dureçs, to their rightful owners.
Article 24
A~wellate rrroceedinss
1. The Appeals Chamber shall hear appeals from persona convicted by the
Trial Chambers or £rom the Prosecutor on the following grounds:
I la) An erfor on a question of law invalidating the decision;or
(b) An error of fact which has occasioned a rniscarriage of justice.
2. The Appeals Chamber may affirm, reverse or revise the decisiona taken
by the Trial Chambers.
Article 25
a Review ~raceedinaç
where a new fact has been discovered which was not known at the time of the
proceedings before the Trial Chambers or the AppeaLs Chamber and whkeh could
have been a decisive factor in reaching the decision, the convicted person or
the Prosecutor may submit ta the International Tribunal for Rwanda an
application for review of the judgement.
Enforcement of sentences
Imprisonmentsh21 be çerved in Rwanda or any of the States on a list of
States which have indicated to the Security Couricil their willingness to accept
convicted persons, as designated by the International Tribunal for Rwanda. Suchs/~E~/955 (1994)
Page 14
imprisonment shall be in accordance with the applicable law of the Çtate .
concerned, subject to the supervisionof the International Tribunal for Rwanda.
Article 27
Pardon or commutation of sentences
If, pursuant to the applicablelaw of the State in which the convieted
person .isimprisoned,h .e or çhe is eligible fus pardon or commutation of
sentence, thé" Sitate concerned çhall notify the InternationalTribunal for Rwanda
aecordiagly. There shall only be pardon or commutation of sentence if the
president of the.lnternationa1 Tribunal for Rwanda, in consultationwith the
judges, so decides on the basis of the intereçts of justice and the general
pzinciples of law.
Article 28
Cooweration and iudicial assistance
1. States shall cooperate with the InternationalTribunal for Rwanda in
the investigationand prosecution'ofperçons accused of comitting serious
violations of internationalhumanitarian law.
2, States çhall comply uithout undue delay with any request for
assistance or an order issued by a Trial Chamber, including,but not limited to:
(al The identificationand location of persons;
(b) The taking of testimony and the production of evidence;
(cl The service of documenta;
(dl- The arrest or detention of pessons;
le) The surrender or the transfer of the aemsed to the International
Tribunal for Rwanda.
Article 29
The status, privilwes and immunitieç of the
InternationalTribunal for Rwanda
1. The Convention on the Privileges and Inwiunities of the United Nations
of 12 February 1946 shall apply to the InternationalTribunal for Rwanda, the
judges, the Prosecutor and hiç or her staff, and the aegistrai: and his or her
staff. s/REÇ/955 (1994)
Page 15
2. The judges. the Prosecutor and the Registrar shall.enjoy the
privileges and i-ities, exemptions and facilitles accorded to diplornatic
envoys, in accordance with internationallaw.
3. The staff of the Prosecutor and of the Registrar shall enjoy the
privileges and immunities aceorded to officlals of the United Nations under
articles V and VI1 of the Convention referred to in paragraph 1 of this article.
4. Other persons, ineludingthe aecused, required at the seat or meeting
place of the InternationalTribunal for Rwanda shall be aceorded such treatment
as is necessary for the proper functioning of the InternationalTribunal for
Rwanda.
menses of the International Tribunal for Rwanda
The expenses of the InternationalTribunal for Rwanda shall be expenses of
the Organization in accordance with Article 17 of the Charter of the United
Nations.
Article 31
The working languages of the InternationalTribunal shall be English and
French.
Article 32
Annual report
The President of the ~ntktional Tribunal for Rwanda shall çubmit an
annual report of the InternationalTribunal for Rwanda to the Security Council
and to the General assemhly. Exhibit 59
Letter dated 5 August 1994 from the representatives of France,
the United Kingdom of Great Britain and NorthernIreland and the
United States of America to the United Nations
addressedto the Secretary-General
(United Nations Document ~/49/299-~/1994/938; 8 August 1994)UNITED
NATIONS
General Assern'bly
Distr.
Security Council Gm-ERAL
A/49/299
s/1994/93e J
9 August 1994
ENGLISH
ORIGINAL : 'ENGLISH AND FREXCH
GENEFQUA AÇSEMBLY SEcZTRITI COUNCIL
Forty-ninth session
Forty-ninthyear
Item 145 of the provisional agenda*
MEASUREÇ TO ELIMINATE INTERNATIONAL
TERRORI SM
Letter àated 5 Auqust 1994 frorn the representatives of France,
the United Kinqdam of Great ri tain and Northern Ireland and
the United States of America to the United Ffatians addressed
to the Seeretarv-General
We have the honour ta transmit herewith the text of a tripartite
declaratioa issued by our,three Governments on 5 August 1994 concerning the
irnplementation of Security Council resolutionç 731 (1992) of 21 January 1992,
748 (1992) of 31 March 1992 and 883 (19931 of 11 November 1993 by the Libyan
Arab Jamahiriya (see annex).
We should be grateful if you would have the text of the psesent letter and
its annex circulated as a document of the General Assembly, under item 145 of
'theprovisional agenda, and of the gecurity Council.
(Siqned} Hem& LADSOUS (Siqned) D. H. A. HRNNAY (Siqned) Madeleine K. &BRIGHT
Chargé d' affaire@ a.k. Permanent Representative Permanent Representative
of the Permanent Mission of the United Kingdom of the United Stases
of France to the of Great Britain and of America to the
United Nations Northern Ireland to United Nations
the United Nations ANNEX
Deelaration made on 5 Auquçt 1994 bv the Governments of France,
the United Klnsdh of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and
the United SEates'of America on the occasion of the seventh
review of sanctiions imosed on the Libvan Arab Jamahiriya by
the securitY ~ohcii. in its resolution 748 (19921 of
' 31 March 1992
.c<-r. ..- *..,..-- . , .
The Governrnentç of France, the ~nited ~ingdum of Great ri tain and Noethem
Ireland and the Unit'ed S'tates.oE America are determined to bring to justice
those responsible'for the bombings of flights Pan Am 103 and UTA 772. The
victims of these two atrocities and their families deserveno'less.
It is now over two years since the adoption by the Security Couneil of
resolutions 731 (1992) of 21 January 1992 and 748 (1992) of 31 March 1992. In
order to comply with those resolutions the Government of the Libyan Arab
Jarnahirira must'ensure the'appearanee of those chargea witb the bombing of Pan
Am 103 for trial before th& ap-priate UK or US court, satisfy the French
judieial authorit-ieswith respect.to.thebombing of UTA 772 and commit: itself
definitively to ceasing al1 forms of terrorist activity and al1 assistance to
terrorist groups and demonstrate,by concrete actions, ita renunciation of
terroriçm.
Today the Council conducted tts seventh review of the sanctions regime
irnposed'on the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya by resolution 748 (1992) and concluded
that Libya had not"yet complied wkth its obligations, which are 'elear,
unconditional and not negotiable. There waç therefore no question of lifting or
suspending the sanctions.
Despite professing wi'll-îngness to cooperate with the French judicial
authokities, the Libyan authoritieshave not responded satisfactorily to the
requests for cooperation Erom the French investigating magiçtrate.
.As regards the Lockerbie issue, the Libyan Arab Jarnahiriya has made a
number of propo.sals,'all of rjhich,would fa11 far short of compliance with the
resolutions. .In particular,a trial 'in a third country, even one before an
international tribunal 0r.a so-called Scottish court, iç unacceptable: suspects
cannot be allowed to choose the venue of their trial. These Libyan propasals
1 are nothing more than attempts to divert attention £rom their refusal to comply.
Our Governmentç note that the Government of the Libyan krab Jamahirlya has
stated that it can accept Che holding of the trial outside Libyan territory,
provided that a just and fair trial can be guaranteed. The three Governments
take this opportunity to errrphasize once more that, in line with numeroua
assurances that have already been given, the two accused will. receive a just and
fair trial before a US ar Scottish court.
Once the secretary-General has reported to the Cauncil that the Libyan Arab
Jamahiriya has satisfied the,French judicial authorities with respect to the
bombing of rrrA 772 and ensured the appearance before the appropriate UK or US A;/49/229
~/1994/93~
English
Page 3
court of those chargea with the bo&ing of Pan Am 103, we for our part will
consider favourably the suspension of the sanctions against the Libyan Arab
Jamahiriya in accordance with paragraph 16 of sesolution 883 (1993) of
11 November 1993, pending the report on Libya's cornpllance with the remaining
provisions of resolutions 731. (1992) and 748 (19921, which the Secretary-General
will produce within 90 days of the suspension. Our Governments recall that in
the case of non-cornpliance the Çecurity Councilhas resolveà to terminatethe
suspension immediately.
There is no need for the eurrent impasse to continue. The solution lies
with the Governrnent of the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya. We reaffirm that we seek no
more than cornpliance with the'reçolutions= Our Governments thereforecal1 once
again on the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, in its om interest and that of its people,
.to fulfil itç obligations completely and without any Eurther*delay. Exhibit 60
S. Rosenne, The Law and Practiceof the InternationalCourt,
p. 70 (1985) THE LAW AND PRACTICE
OF THE
INTERNATIONAL COURT
SECONDREVIEDITION
a-buAotheKt-NACMEMICPUôLiSHGROUP
DORDRECHJBOGTO/MC- *Distriburom
for the UnitedStateand Canada: KluwerAcademicPublishers. 130 Oid Derby
Street, Hingham, MA 02043, USA
for the UK and Ireland: KluwerAcademic Publishers, MTF Press Limited,
Falcon House, Queen Square, LancasterLAI RN,UK
for alofhercountries:KluwerAcademicPublishers Group, DistributionCenter,
P.O. Box322, 3300 AH Dordrecht,TheNetherlands
Book information
ISBH 90.247-2-
Firstdition 1%5, published by A.W. Sijthoff
Second revisededition 1985
Rosenne,Çhmbtil.
The Iaand pticticof the IntcrnitiwCourt.
ReprintOriginallpubltihedbpden : A.U.
Sijtkoff,t%5.
Liatof author'srofkr:p.
Ineludcindex.
t.Internationilourtof Juacica,1.fitle.
JXlQ71+6.B611985 3*t .5'12 85-2997
1SM 90-267-2986-6
O 1985 by Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, ordrecht.
Al1 rightsrcsmtd. No partof this pubüdon may k rcprducd, stortd ina
rctricvalsystcm, or transmittd in any fom or by any means, mechanid,
photocopying,rcfordmg ,r othttwise,withoutthe priorwrittm MÎn of
the pubüshtrs,
Martinus Nijhoff Pubüshers, P.O. Box163, 3300 AD brdrecht,
TheNdhertands.70 THE POLITSCAL AWD I#STIfUTIOHAL ROtB O? THE COURT
ma& tothe temu ditac~mtintriim'Itthnidcpcnl upaatbt
oftaeCharterwheth~mchat~dwiiin~upnthth~
otha~paiorgafyormm~ptrniarmEortbcm;hiilgaKalit
cannotkdoubtdthatthemutual~dthtpincipai~
oughttobtbarcdupagmmdheqd~betrv.ai*hem
înthepudtOfthePi~d~~
Thbap~openithtwaytoa~~oftbetyk
dtheCourtini~~~tyda~~~rg~~~dtbtUnitedNotiwi,
oEcordi ngwhieh,iutjccttoavttriding dhw (in-
d~judid~),tk~mwt~inrbe~-
mmt0ftbeaimdthtOrg;rriuo arw* ditrivetogivedktt~tht
dePnoaidother~ppioraant,dnot~~~
muid rm& tbemnrig~toy.A udui QEP~PI ~this breniin the
~~~(mio),~th*.Corrrih9ioA.~ontht
q~afj~wtiichimhrmappdoimcdtheiarcr-
~aFotpaeUl~purportiaetogmc&etoouieartltr
reiolutiondtbekdty~ptttyupnthe~ken-
itoingfullcffeeetOthat~tiwlA~Irter,iatbePovrP~
~thcCIurtre6Predtm'ia~intht.~dth
Oqpab&dua-why,in-itibwldmdtmtio
giveuiodniwy~~kfu~~midmtùatcue: Exhibit 61,
T. Elsen, Litispendence Between the International Court of
Justice and the Security Council,p. 69 (1986) LITISPENDENCEBETWEEN
THE INTERNATIONALCOURTOF JTUSICE
AND THE..SECURITCOUNCIL Q 1986T.M.C.A= InstitnrThcHague
;AU nght~d. No panof ihipubtimtbn mabcreprodud. storeina dd systm,
ortmnsmittd inany fororb anymtaok tlccfroni~mcchaaic., photocopring.reorrdrng
oihemisc withwprior httmMion ofthe publisfim.
ISBN 906704OQ1X
CIP
Iotrmah*rsitIndtml mr Mmmlhd RcriTMC L.LlltOat
DU Alnaahmat. 2514SM TheHe Phone (0)70.630900,
Tcia 34273srscni
Dcpuiy direc:A. Nkiid: ds ofDqanmrnP:M. Simiampouwprime InterrratiLaw),
KoSwanSi (FubiiIntanationLaar)A.E.Kekmm (Law oftheEu- Commuaiun,
Gcad secmaly):Insfinilt m. deRoodE
TheT.M.C.Asscfbut tvrfoundd in1%5 bythcDutcuniradilioffenngauraesihtcr-
narionalInioprwiote eduatioandrciaiehm ik rd& of k*rcewd bythedeprtmmts
of thInsurut:rivptIn- Lew, tutemationaiCommerd Arbiuatie Pu-
blicIareraatioLnwWuding the tm oftaraPuid - andbw of&c Em
pcm coumi-
TheInstituedischarthi Prk byh embüihmmt andp t ofdaeummution aiid
mach prqecyia i m in-u withnon-Dutcbat intenmioaoeri-
on%by thediuemioirioofinfoe thmfmm oadby publiarioofmonograptu
andsmier In addition,Tk Ins-p.ter in thcdihgof thcbAmk CommrraalArbi-
rmtionandin thedihgandpubüshmgof, inmal4 tk NcthaiaDdIntmwiomJ Law Wm
andthe NcthntPPdïbdmk ofIutmaliod Eaw.of in which the Security Council in the discharge of that re-
sponsibility needs, and aceordingly takes advantage of, com-
.pletelyunhampered freedm of action.lb9) Even tfiough the
situation can involve many interesting 3 usticiable issues ,
adjudication by the Court, pending proceedings in the
Council, could unnecessarily camplicate and aggravate the
situation. Aceordingly, in such a situation, instead of pro-
motin$ the peaceful settlgnent of disputes the Court could
endanger the maintenance of international peace and security,
the veFy backbone of the organization./70) Thus, a'direct
confliet betueen the reaponsibilities of the Court and the .a
Council could resuit bao this situation. Heither the Charter
not the JwfsprLKience of the Court offer an explicktsolution
for this contingent situatfon. It seens, buwer , imperative
that in view of its prlmary responsibility the Couneil shoilld
prevail.
So far , thfs hypothetical sktuation has not oecursed ,at
Least not in eonjunction with the pendemy of simultaneous
proceedingsbefore the Cdwt and the Comcil.(ll) In the
three most recent cases revieud litfspendenee -3 invoked by
one of the dlsputing parties. In none of those cases the
Courieil aeened disturbed by the parallel proceedings before
the International Gourt. The situation dl1 be eompletely
diiierent in case the Couneil invokes principles of litis-
pendence and calls an the Court to defer to the pending
Cbuncil proeeedinga.
WFthouE trying to ofier final solutionsit 1s suggested
ta sonePude likth sme refleetions that might offer guidance
in approaching the gap left by the International Court.
Documentary exhibits submitted by the United States of America (volume 2)