United Nations Security Council Resolution 1192 – On Lockerbie case
Resolution 1192 (1998)
The Security Council,
Recalling its resolutions 731 (1992) of 21 January 1992, 748 (1992) of31 March 1992 and 883 (1993) of 11 November 1993,
Noting the report of the independent experts appointed by the Secretary-General (S/1997/991),
Having regard to the contents of the letter dated 24 August 1998 from the Acting Permanent Representatives of the United Kingdom of Great Britain And Northern Ireland and of the United States of America to the Secretary-General(S/1998/795),
Noting also, in light of the above resolutions, the communications of the Organization of African Unity, the League of Arab States, the Non-Aligned Movement and the Islamic Conference (S/1994/373, S/1995/834, S/1997/35,S/1997/273, S/1997/406, S/1997/497, S/1997/529) as referred to in the letter of 24 August 1998,
Acting under Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations,
1. Demands once again that the Libyan Government immediately comply with the above-mentioned resolutions;
2. Welcomes the initiative for the trial of the two persons charged with the bombing of Pan Am flight 103 (“the two accused”) before a Scottish courtsitting in the Netherlands, as contained in the letter dated 24 August 1998 from the Acting Permanent Representatives of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and of the United States of America (“the initiative”) and it’s attachments, and the willingness of the Government of the Netherlands to cooperate in the implementation of the initiative;
3. Calls upon the Government of the Netherlands and the Government of the United Kingdom to take such steps as are necessary to implement the initiative, including the conclusion of arrangements with a view to enabling the court described in paragraph 2 to exercise jurisdiction in the terms of the Intended Agreement between the two Governments, attached to the said letter of24 August 1998;
4. Decides that all States shall cooperate to this end, and in particular that the Libyan Government shall ensure the appearance in the Netherlands of the two accused for the purpose of trial by the court described in paragraph 2, and that the Libyan Government shall ensure that any evidence or witnesses in Libyaare, upon the request of the court, promptly made available at the court in the Netherlands for the purpose of the trial;
5. Requests the Secretary-General, after consultation with the Governmentof the Netherlands, to assist the Libyan Government with the physicalarrangements for the safe transfer of the two accused from Libya direct to theNetherlands;
6. Invites the Secretary-General to nominate international observers toattend the trial;
7. Decides further that, on the arrival of the two accused in the Netherlands, the Government of the Netherlands shall detain the two accused pending their transfer for the purpose of trial before the court described in paragraph 2;
8. Reaffirms that the measures set forth in its resolutions 748 (1992)and 883 (1993) remain in effect and binding on all Member States, and in thiscontext reaffirms the provisions of paragraph 16 of resolution 883 (1993), and decides that the aforementioned measures shall be suspended immediately if the Secretary-General reports to the Council that the two accused have arrived inthe Netherlands for the purpose of trial before the court described in paragraph 2 or have appeared for trial before an appropriate court in the United Kingdom or the United States, and that the Libyan Government has satisfied the French judicial authorities with regard to the bombing of UTA 772;
9. Expresses its intention to consider additional measures if the two accused have not arrived or appeared for trial promptly in accordance with paragraph 8;
10. Decides to remain seized of the matter.
Adopted by the Security Council at its 3920th meeting,on 27 August 1998.
Related Posts:
- R (on the application of Smith) (FC) v Secretary of…
- R (on the application of Nicklinson and another) v…
- R (on the application of AM) (AP) v The Director of…
- R (on the application of AM) (AP) v The Director of…
- Joseph Osemwegie Idehen & Ors. Vs George Otutu…
- Perry and others v Serious Organised Crime Agency