| I. | Substantive International Law - First Part |
| 4. | SUBJECTS OF INTERNATIONAL LAW |
| 4.2. | States |
| 4.2.1. | Jurisdiction of States |
¤
Questions of Interpretation and Application
of the 1971 Montreal Convention arising
from the Aerial Incident at Lockerbie
(Libyan Arab Jamahiriya / United Kingdom),
Provisional Measures, Order of 14 April 1992,
I.C.J. Reports 1992, p. 3
[pp. 18-19 Decl. Oda 1] III. In my view it is important to bear in mind that the rights susceptible of protection in a given case must lie within
the scope of the object stated in the Application. Now, on the one hand, Libya instituted proceedings against the United Kingdom in respect of a dispute over
the interpretation and application of the 1971 Montreal Convention. On the other
hand, it is a matter of general international law that, while no State (unless
by virtue of any convention) is obliged to extradite its own nationals, any
State may exercise criminal jurisdiction over crimes committed in its own
territory or may claim criminal jurisdiction over acts done abroad by aliens
which are prejudicial to its security or certain offences recognized by the
community of nations as of universal concern. This does not necessarily relate
to the rights granted by the Montreal Convention, which are the subject of the
present case and fall to be clarified in the merits phase. The rights of which
Libya claims protection in its request for interim measures cannot, thus, be
assumed to constitute rights under the Montreal Convention and to fall within
the scope of the Application, but are rather sovereign rights under general
international law.
| 1 | Cf. Questions of Interpretation and Application of the 1971 Montreal Convention arising from the Aerial Incident at Lockerbie (Libyan Arab Jamahiriya / United States of America), Provisional Measures, Order of 14 April 1992, I.C.J. Reports 1992, pp. 130-131. |
