Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

SANCTIONS WITHOUT LAW? THE LOCKERBIE CASE (PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS)

SANCTIONS WITHOUT LAW? THE LOCKERBIE CASE (PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS) and1. Introduction Libya instituted proceedings against the United States and the United Kingdom under Art 40(1) of the Court's statute and Art 38 of the Court's rules on 3 March 1992. It also filed a separate request for provisional measures in pursuance of Art 41 of the Court's Statute and Articles 73, 74, and 75 of the Court's rules. The two cases (that between Libya and the United Kingdom, and that between the Libya and the United States) are, for all practical intents and purposes, identical, but there are certain potentially significant differences. The dispute arose out of the crash of Pan Am Flight 103 on 21 December 1988 over Lockerbie Pursuant to the crash, the Lord Advocate of Scotland and the United States District Court of Columbia indicted two Libyan nationals said to be responsible for the affair. A number of Security Council Resolutions were adopted, requiring Libya to surrender its two nationals for trial outside Libyan jurisdiction, and imposing economic sanctions on Libya.' Libya, however, maintained (a) that it had complied with the Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts against the Safety of Civil Aviation, (hereinafter, "the Convention") signed at Montreal on 23 September 1971, (b) http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Austrian Review of International and European Law Online Brill

SANCTIONS WITHOUT LAW? THE LOCKERBIE CASE (PRELIMINARY OBJECTIONS)

Loading next page...
 
/lp/brill/sanctions-without-law-the-lockerbie-case-preliminary-objections-GZPkF2Qz4f

References

References for this paper are not available at this time. We will be adding them shortly, thank you for your patience.

Publisher
Brill
Copyright
Copyright © Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, The Netherlands
eISSN
1573-6512
DOI
10.1163/157365199X00103
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

and1. Introduction Libya instituted proceedings against the United States and the United Kingdom under Art 40(1) of the Court's statute and Art 38 of the Court's rules on 3 March 1992. It also filed a separate request for provisional measures in pursuance of Art 41 of the Court's Statute and Articles 73, 74, and 75 of the Court's rules. The two cases (that between Libya and the United Kingdom, and that between the Libya and the United States) are, for all practical intents and purposes, identical, but there are certain potentially significant differences. The dispute arose out of the crash of Pan Am Flight 103 on 21 December 1988 over Lockerbie Pursuant to the crash, the Lord Advocate of Scotland and the United States District Court of Columbia indicted two Libyan nationals said to be responsible for the affair. A number of Security Council Resolutions were adopted, requiring Libya to surrender its two nationals for trial outside Libyan jurisdiction, and imposing economic sanctions on Libya.' Libya, however, maintained (a) that it had complied with the Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts against the Safety of Civil Aviation, (hereinafter, "the Convention") signed at Montreal on 23 September 1971, (b)

Journal

Austrian Review of International and European Law OnlineBrill

Published: Jan 1, 2000

There are no references for this article.