UN Secretary General Kofi Annan said Wednesday he was considering a trip to Libya if it would enable the trial to take place in The Netherlands. Annan's comment heightened speculation that Libyan leader Moamer Kadhafi might be preparing to end a six-year standoff with the UN Security Council by handing over the pair.
And now Kofi Annan said he would go to Libya to help to secure the handover of the suspects if he thought it would be thinks it is helpful, but he had not made up his mind. A UN source said: "There is now a good chance the suspects might finally be brought to trial. There is a sense of optimism." The news came as a terrorism expert said that slack security measures at international airports could give terrorists the opportunity to carry out another mid-air bombing like Lockerbie.
Many airports lack adequate high-explosive detection equipment and do not have tight procedures to prevent unaccompanied luggage getting on to planes, the authors of a new book have warned. Professor Paul Wilkinson, one of the editors of the book, Aviation, Terrorism and Security, said he hoped governments would recognise that weaknesses in the international airport security network could be exploited by bombers. Security experts from Britain, the US, Canada and Israel, who contributed to the book, want it to be a "wake-up call" to governments. Contributors to the book, which is published by Frank Cass in London next month, argue that the new generation of terrorists are more ruthless than their predecessors.
A spokeswoman for the publisher said: "The authors' findings, though not alarmist, are worrying. Despite significant improvements in aviation security in certain countries, another Lockerbie could happen as a result of terrorists exploiting weak links in aviation security." Prof Wilkinson, who lectures in international relations at St Andrews University, said there were problems with airport security in some African, Latin American and Asian countries. Significant improvements have been made in Britain since the Lockerbie bombing, which killed 270 people, but weak links in foreign airports made it possible for terrorists to explode a bomb over Britain.
Prof Wilkinson said that a lack of properly trained staff at foreign airports, poor security management and low-quality explosives detection equipment were problems. Another weakness was inadequate baggage retrieval procedures. The bomb that blew up over Lockerbie is alleged to have been placed in a suitcase which was transferred unaccompanied from Malta to Frankfurt then transferred at Heathrow on to the Pan Am 103 jet. Britain now has bar coding on luggage to ensure that all baggage corresponds to passengers on a flight.
Prof Wilkinson said that security was poor even for domestic flights in the United States. Last year, the Gore commission on aviation security in the US, set up after the 1996 crash of the TWA jet over Long Island, recommended bar coding on luggage, but this has still not been introduced because of wrangles between the airlines, the US government and the Federal Aviation Authority over cost and responsibility.
Prof Wilkinson said yesterday: "There have been great improvements in aviation security in Britain and considerable improvement in the US and other countries., but sadly there are very weak links in international aviation security systems. "There are airports around the world with bad security and sadly we have to admit that another Lockerbie could happen. "Although we can be sure that our aviation security system is good, we can't know for sure that a plane flying over this country doesn't contain a bomb."
"The US still have great weaknesses in the security of their domestic flights and still have a very slow adoption of high explosive detection systems even though that is the country which has researched and developed these mechanisms. It is ironic. "The Gore Commission made some excellent recommendations but unfortunately many of them have not yet been implemented because of difficulties about cost and who does what." The book also looks at other threats to airliners such as hijacking and missile attacks.
Meanwhile western diplomats and sources in Libya believe that reports that three senior Libyan security chiefs have been arrested and jailed are unconnected to the Lockerbie case. The men were reported to have been jailed in Tripoli for five and seven years for dereliction of duty over the bombing of Pan Am 103. Western diplomatic Sources and contacts in Libya said they believed that the arrests, if true, were connected to an alleged botched attempt to assassinate the Libyan leader, Colonel Muammar al-Gaddafi, within the past year.
A Western source said: "They may have been arrested, but we believe they are now back at their desks." Britain and the US are still awaiting a response from Tripli to their offer to try the two Libyans accused of the Lockerbie bombing at a neutral venue in the Netherlands. The two governments want a positive response before 21 December, the 10th anniversary of the atrocity.
Libyan lawyers have held lengthy discussions in recent months with the U.N. legal counsel, Hans Corell, seeking clarification of this and other issues. Annan said the Security Council had given him specific tasks ``including working with the Libyans to ensure delivery of the two to the Netherlands.'' He said Corell had done a good job working with the Libyan lawyers, adding: ``I think we have offered most of the clarifications and I had hoped we would be able to bring the issue to closure by the end of November. We are still pressing for that.''
At this point he raised the possibility of dealing with the Lockerbie question during the resumed North African trip that he interrupted earlier this month because of a crisis over Iraq. Annan did not say where he might meet Libyan officials, but one report said it could be on the Libyan-Tunisian border. He is due in Algeria on Dec. 1-2 and in Tunisia on Dec. 3-4.
Two London newspapers, The Guardian and the leading Arabic daily Al-Hayat, reported today that three top intelligence chiefs at the time of the airliner bombing had been convicted and imprisoned in Libya. The Guardian said Abdullah al-Senussi, Musa Koussa and Mohammed al-Misrati were sentenced to between five and seven years in prison earlier this month. Quoting ``well-placed sources,'' the Guardian said the charge filed against the three was ``dereliction of duty,'' but gave no further details.
Al-Hayat's report said it had questioned Libyan Justice Minister Mohamed Belgasim al-Zuwiy about the purported trials, but he had replied only that ``trials are going on all the time.'' The Guardian and Al-Hayat suggested that the jailing of the three was aimed at blocking their testimony at a trial of the two Libyan suspects which, under a plan approved by the U.N. Security Council, would be heard by Scottish judges in the Netherlands.
Libyan dissidents claimed the jailings probably were a total invention leaked by Gadhafi's government. One dissident said the three men had been close associates of Gadhafi for decades and were ``too valuable for Gadhafi to dispose of them.'' Al-Senousi was head of the Libyan intelligence service and Koussa was in charge of its foreign operations during the 1988 bombing. The third man, al-Misrati, was a senior official in the Revolutionary Committees.
The dissidents claimed Gadhafi's long resistance to turning over al-Megrahi and Fhimah allegedly stemmed from fear that their testimony would directly implicate his government in the bombing.
But rumors like these have been put forward by Libyan dissidents before, and perhaps the source of information is not quite trustworthy.....it is the sort of "information" Libyan dissidents are expected to let out from time to time. Until there is any proof of such a jailing, the matter remains a rumor.
The Guardian article from
wednesday November 25, 1998:
http://reports.guardian.co.uk/articles/1998/11/25/p-34967.html
For more transcripts from other debates about Lockerbie at the Common Hansard, go HERE.
However, the diplomats said no headway had been made in Libya's demand that the two accused, if convicted, be imprisoned in the Netherlands, rather than in the Scottish prison at Barlinnie, a position the United States and Britain say is not negotiable.
British Foreign Office minister Tony Lloyd told parliament on Wednesday that Tripoli had not been given a deadline but he said this did not mean ``we can wait around indefinitely for a response.
Q: It's been three months since the United States offered to hold a trial in neutral territory for Libyan suspects in the bombing of Pan Am Flight 103. Is there some sort of deadline for Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi?
Albright : First of all, there has been no response, but there has been a seeking of clarifications by Libyan lawyers through the United Nation, so there is clearly an interest in the proposal. We have made very clear that it's a ''take it or leave it'' proposal, no negotiations. And as I told the families (of the bombing victims), with whom I met, 10 days ago or so, that Dec. 21, which is the 10-year anniversary, is a date that is seared into our minds. This offer - not offer, proposal - is not on the table indefinitely. And if they don't accept it, then we will go back to the Security Council and actually consider some of the additional measures.
Q: So if the Libyans don't accept it by Dec. 21, you'll suggest an oil embargo?
Albright: I didn't say that. I'm not setting, I'm just saying that date is seared into our minds.
Libya, according to U.N. officials, will send the same team of top-flight lawyers to talk to Hans Corell, the chief U.N. legal counsel, as they did for two weeks last month. Corell's staff conveys queries to the United States and Britain and receives their replies.
So far Libya has objected to U.S.-British insistence that the two accused, if convicted, be imprisoned in Scotland, rather than in the Netherlands. It also opposes the venue of the trial chosen by the Dutch, Camp Zeist, a former military base near Utrecht.
Asked if there had been a breakthrough,'' U.S. envoy Peter Burleigh said on Friday: ``None that I am aware of.'' He said he hoped the new round of meetings ``will bring this issue to closure and whatever outstanding issues there are from the Libyan side will be satisfied.''
The United States wants to see progress by Dec. 21, the 10th anniversary of the explosion, relatives of the victims reported after a meeting with U.S. Secretary of State Madeleine Albright last month. She indicated the offer might be withdrawn and Washington would try to impose additional sanctions, such as an oil embargo against Libya. But chances are slim council members would cut off Libya's oil, a measure proposed unsuccessfully by Washington several times in the past.
``If Libya fails to act, the United States and Britain will ask the council to meet again in mid-December to consider Libya's response,'' Burleigh said in late October.
Libya also said it wanted the council to lift rather than suspend sanctions, including an arms and air embargo, imposed in 1992 and tightened in 1993, once the suspects were surrendered. Council resolutions call for suspension because of other issues involved in its original sanctions resolution.
In practice, however, U.S. and British envoys say that once the embargoes are suspended it would be nearly impossible to reapply them. They noted that to reimpose them would require another Security Council vote, which would probably fail.
"I'm encouraged that the Libyans are seriously engaged on our proposal," Cook said in an interview last week. "There has been no grandstanding or wasting of time."
Cook said indications from Libya suggested that Muammar Gadaffi wanted to break the deadlock over the fate of the two men, Abdel Baset Ali al-Megrahi and Al-Amin Khalifa Fhimah. They are accused of placing a suitcase bomb aboard the Pan Am 103 jet that blew up over the Scottish town of Lockerbie on December 21 1988, killing all 259 people aboard and 11 on the ground.
The foreign secretary said he was particularly encouraged by the recent appointment of a senior Libyan team of lawyers, headed by Kamel al-Maghour, a former foreign minister, to represent the pair.
British sources said they had been told by the United Nations that the Libyans were "largely happy" with assurances given by the British government three weeks ago concerning the planned conduct of legal proceedings.
This followed an Anglo-American proposal made in August under which the two would be tried in the Hague under Scottish law before a panel of Scottish judges and not in London or Washington.
Among the assurances, Britain has guaranteed Libya that the offer of a trial in the Netherlands is not merely a ruse to get hold of the men and send them to America or Britain. The families of the accused have been promised access to them and the defence team allowed to call witnesses from Britain.
The government has also tried to assuage Gadaffi's fears that senior Libyan officials called to testify might be arrested. "Anyone who comes and gives evidence . . . is immune from arrest for offences in the past," Cook said. He also insisted the West would honour its pledge to end sanctions imposed on Libya immediately the suspects were handed over.
First indications of how quickly the men may be handed over could emerge after the Libyan legal team meets Hans Correll, the Swedish diplomat who is the United Nations' top legal officer, in New York tomorrow.
The only remaining key sticking point is the Libyan demand that al-Megrahi and Fhimah should be imprisoned in the Netherlands rather than Britain if convicted. Cook says this remains non-negotiable. "If convicted of offences under Scottish jurisdiction, they will serve time in a Scottish prison," he said. "There are two cells in Barlinnie [prison] prepared." Cook has made bringing the Libyans to justice a priority since taking office in May last year.
On his desk in the Foreign Office is a constant reminder of the tragedy: a glass globe Cook calls the "Lockerbie snow ball", which was sent by the relative of an American victim. When it is turned upside down, snows falls on miniature Lockerbie memorials.
Friday November 13 : Oral arguements on the Libyan appeal of the rejection of their contention that they cannot be sued in a civil Pan Am 103- liability trial in the US because they enjoy "foreign soverign immunity" will be heard by the Appealate Court in New York.
``The Security Council has no right to handle the Lockerbie issue since the International Court of Justice (ICJ), which is the judicial body of the United Nations, ruled the Council had no juridiction over the matter,'' Gaddafi said in his letter read on Wednesday on Libyan television. The ICJ last February said it had juridiction to look into the case and Tripoli interpreted the ruling as an exclusion of the Security Council from the case.
``We want to warn that if the Security Council continued to...challenge the ICJ's ruling...Libya will seriously consider quitting the U.N...
Background info: For more on the ICJ ruling and the case, PRESS HERE or take a look at the news archive. Full text of Gaddafis letter to the UN will follow soon.
The overwhelming majority of the Security Council's members went on record for an early implementation of resolution 1192, which is to lead to the actual stoppage of the sanctions and the closure of the case. The emphasis was made on the need for a prompt and effective completion of contacts between UN undersecretary-general for legal affairs and Libyan defence to clear a number of organisational and juridical matters to start the trial.
The Russian delegation called the attention to humanitarian consequences of the sanctions, Rakhmanin said. It is believed very important in Moscow that all the sides concerned continue to act constructively and exert their efforts to the utmost to start the trial in accordance with resolution 1192.
Britain has given Libya fresh assurances about the proposed trial of the two Lockerbie bombing suspects in The Hague, amid mounting fears that the Libyan leader is trying to build a case against their handover.
In the latest attempt to coax Muammar Gadafy into surrendering Abdel Baset Ali al-Megrahi and Khalifa Fhimah, the Foreign Office said that, if the accused were convicted, access to them would be strictly controlled by Scottish prison authorities and that they could not be moved to the United States.
It has also told Tripoli that the two would be able to complain to Scottish civil liberties groups if they so wished, and that United Nations sanctions against Libya would be suspended when the two arrived in The Hague. The assurances were passed to the UN yesterday after Libya insisted on Thursday that any delay in handing over the suspects was being caused by the need for more clarification from London and Washington. Both countries want to maintain pressure on Libya after their dramatic U-turn in August when they announced that the suspects, described as intelligence officers, could be tried under Scottish law in The Hague.
Robin Cook, the Foreign Secretary, said last week that Britain had already given positive assurances on 11 of 12 questions posed by Libya, but would not negotiate over the demand that they be jailed outside Scotland. The latest reply says that access to prisoners is strictly controlled. Libya has also been told that Camp Zeist, the base where the trial is to held, is a purely Dutch facility. "There is no question of US air force planes coming in and whisking them away," said one Foreign Office diplomat.
A Libyan legal team was in New York for three weeks last month and will return on November 9 for discussions with UN officials.
Libya said again on Thursday that it wanted sanctions lifted rather than suspended. Security Council resolutions call for suspension because there are outstanding issues - notably the case against Libya for the 1989 bombing of a French UTA airliner over Chad, in which 170 people died. In practice, however, it would be nearly impossible to re-apply the embargoes once they were suspended.
EXTRACT from a copy of the agreement between the UK and Netherlands Governments on where and how a trial dealing with the Lockerbie plane disaster might be held: "Article 10 - exemption from taxes and duties. The Scottish Court shall ... d) be exempt from excise duty included in the price of alcoholic beverages, tobacco products and hydrocarbons such as fuel oils purchased by the Scottish Court and necessary for its official activities."
Sober as a judge, your honour.
Background info: On 29 April 1997, the United States Supreme Court let stand a ruling that Libya has sovereign immunity shielding it from a lawsuit filed on behalf of a victim killed in the bombing of Pan Am Flight 103. The civil case was brought by Bruce Smith, whose wife, Ingrid, was among the 259 people killed when a bomb exploded in a suitcase on board the plane. A U.S. Court of Appeals in New York in November 1995 upheld a federal judge's ruling dismissing the lawsuit against Libya for lack of jurisdiction. It said Libya enjoyed immunity under the foreign sovereign immunities law. The relatives appealed that decision.
For more on the November 1995-decision, read the waiver Smith vs. Libya
For more on Bruce Smith and his mission, read how he funded an anti-terrorism reward.
Following is a translation of the Libyan TV announcement, by courtesy of Libya News List:
Tripoli Libyan Television Network in Arabic 1930 GMT 27 Oct 98
The General People's Committee for Foreign Liaison and International Cooperation has issued the following statement:
The British foreign secretary, Robin Cook, made a statement to the British newspaper The Guardian on 26 October 1998. He said that his country's patience was wearing thin with regard to the handing over of the two suspects in the crash of Pan Am 103. He threatened that in case they are not handed over quickly his country will work to tighten sanctions [on Libya] before the 10th anniversary of the aircraft explosion on 21 December 1998.
The American secretary of state and the American president's adviser for national security affairs met the victims' families on 26th October 1998. The secretary of state was quoted as saying that in case the British-American offer expires her country will launch a campaign to impose tighter sanctions on Libya.
Faced with these threats, the General People's Committee for Foreign Liaison and International Cooperation can only express its astonishment at this harmony between the British and American statements. This confirms what it [the committee] warned against, that is the British-American initiative is nothing but an arranged trick whose stages are agreed upon.
It is aimed at misguiding international and regional organizations and international public opinion. It is only a plan for tightening sanctions. These statements deliberately ignore the positive steps taken by Libya in order to deal with the British-American offer despite its having taken no part in drafting it and its several reservations regarding some of its points. Libya was supported in this [matter] by regional and international organizations which expressed its legitimacy.
To show its seriousness, it [Libya] sent a legal delegation to the General Secretariat of the United Nations to put forward and discuss the guarantees and rights needed to be observed in order to hold a fair and just trial of the suspects within the framework of the international treaties and charters in effect as well as the principles of international law. Despite the delay in obtaining visas to America for the delegation for over a week, the delegation held serious talks with the assistant secretary-general for legal affairs which lasted three weeks. During these talks, the delegation obtained the reactions of the parties concerned.
These were commented on and returned to the assistant secretary-general for legal affairs for further explanations. Some responses and answers have not been given by some of the parties concerned yet.
According to a suggestion by the assistant secretary-general, another meeting will be held on 9 November 1998. The competent bodies in the Jamahiriyah are studying the incomplete responses obtained by the delegation while waiting for the rest of the required responses.
Therefore, Libya is not responsible for any delay. It does not accept the allegation that it is procrastinating in order to buy time as the other parties allege even though the entire world knows that they are the ones who delayed the trial of the suspects for over four years. The British foreign secretary remarked that his country's patience was wearing thin while he ignores that the patience of the Libyan people, and the international and regional organizations which support them, is the one which is wearing thin because of the injustice afflicted upon the Libyan people because of the unjust sanctions.
The General People's Committee for Foreign Liaison and International Cooperation deems the British-American statements a planned attempt to prepare an incorrect atmosphere for the periodic revision of the sanctions on 29 October 1998. Instead of responding to the demands of many of the Security Council's members calling for the lifting of the sanctions, through these statements they [America and Britain] seek to tighten the sanctions and setting deadlines for this.
Britain and the United States have been asking African and Arab states to put pressure on Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi to hand the two men over before the 10th anniversary of the bombing on December 21. The U.S. government said on Monday the offer to Libya would lapse if it felt Libya was playing for time. The United States would then resume a campaign for tougher sanctions.
Britain's Foreign Secretary Robin Cook insisted on Tuesday that Britain would not accept a Libyan demand that the two suspects in the Lockerbie bombing should serve their sentences outside Scotland if they were found guilty.
