International aviation terrorism. The Lockerbie affair between law and politics

Abstract

Abstract On 21 December 1988 a civil airliner, Pan Am 103, blew apart over the town of Lockerbie, Scotland. This was a major terrorist attack against civil aviation, which shocked billions of people and gained worldwide media attention. This thesis examines the Lockerbie case in its political and legal dimension as a heinous and spectacular example of international aviation terrorism. First, it discusses the very idea of terrorism and the inherent definitional problems. Then, it focuses on the disaster and its aftermath. The thesis approaches the numerous issues this complex case raised as years went by. In particular, it portrays the long-standing diplomatic and political wrangle between the United Kingdom and the United States on one side and Libya on the other side. The International Court of Justice and the United Nations Security Council were both involved in this case. The thesis tries to depict the inextricable link between law and politics within the United Nations framework and the difficult balance the judicial and the political powers need striking for a correct and fruitful functioning of the whole system. The Lockerbie case turned out to be a testing-gown for the inherent consistency of the United Nations set-up. Extradition of the alleged perpetrators of the bombing was the issue at stake. For the first time ever, the Security Council imposed sanctions on a sovereign state in order to secure to justice the alleged perpetrators of a terrorist attack. And this raised another pivotal issue that this thesis explores: the adequacy of sanctions as a means for inducing a country’s leadership to adopt a certain course of action. The Lockerbie case is also a story of unofficial diplomacy where mediation of enlightened leaders such as Nelson Mandela proved pivotal. The stance that so-called emerging powers took was also crucial to determine the course of the following events. Ultimately, a criminal trial took place and somebody was convicted for the heinous onslaught. This thesis tries to analyse the Lockerbie trial in its peculiarity: for the first time ever, a national Court sat in a foreign country in order to deal with a criminal case. If the parties to the dispute had not compromised on the idea of a neutral venue where to stage the trial, the latter would have probably never come about. Yet, the criminal trial was not the closing chapter of the lengthy Lockerbie saga. Of course, for the grieving families of the victims, the fact that somebody was held accountable was better than nothing. Yet, the said families also tried to advocate their own cause and get something more than a criminal verdict convicting one single person. Restitution being impossible, there was still room for monetary compensation. This thesis focuses on the lengthy and painful battle the families of the Lockerbie victims engaged in. It was a double battle, actually: one against the airline that had somehow let one of its aircraft crash and one against the Libyan Government, which might be held responsible for the deeds of its agents. None of the two was an easy battle to win and yet it was pivotal to fight both, if justice was to be achieved. In the event, the Lockerbie case came to an end. Somebody was convicted for Pan Am 103 bombing and the families of the victims got some money in compensation, both from the airline and the Libyan Government. In the meantime, the world geopolitics has been changing. The relationship between the West and Libya is no longer as tense as it was. The African state is back to the international fold. This took a long time to be achieved but it happened through the use of legal tools. In the aftermath of the disaster, striking back by military means might have been an option but it was ruled out. In this respect, this thesis tries to show that law and politics can interact in a fruitful way, thus preventing escalations of violence. Whether they also achieve substantial justice might however be questionable.