Whereas the International Court of Justice shall interpret the UN Charter, as relates to Articles 41, 42, 51, and 25 of Chapter VII of the UN Charter concerning redress from the UN Security Council, as relates to matters expressly relevant to treaty which ratified the Montreal Convention. And seeing to it that such convention shall correspond to the prohibition of the forcibly taking, possessing, or destruction, of an airliner, under any circumstances, and as such. It is in light of these statutes, and all relevant statutes granting the ICJ jurisdiction over these considerations therewith, that the ICJ declined the Libyan government request, in the case arising from the Aerial Incident at Lockerbie (Libyan Arab Jamahiriya v. United States of America) non gratis. Such was the opinion of the Court that Libya could in fact still be held liable for the Lockerbie bombings, despite the capacities afforded to it as a liberal nation state, which sought to sue the families of the deceased for having violated Article 25 of the UN Charter, erga omnes partes, in situ lex specialis, una foras. This interpretation of the UN mandate has been noted as being especially egregious by many public scholars, as well as by all Western Governments. For the particulars of this case it is especially telling that a number of enumerations of the UN Charter were noted against the government of Libya, including Articles 41, personae rationae; 42, personae materiae; and 51, personae temporis.

It goes without saying that the UN Charter as well as the Geneva Conventions governing the Conduct of War, and the treatment of the wounded and sick, expressly Conventions 1, 2, and 3; as well as prisoners of war, and Common Article III governing the treatment of hostiles on the battlefield,  must also be included concerning these crimes.

The attempt to sue the families of the deceased for having in effect been killed by the Libyan Government goes against all legal and customary norms as enumerated in the Vienna Conventions, the Geneva, and Hague Conventions, as well as any known customary laws, either Western, or otherwise.

The Libyan Governments argument that Article 25 expressly enjoys them the permissions to act on behalf of the international community, is in itself egregious, and unmistakable for its corruptible, and faulty logic.

In fact, it could be easily deduced from its faulty logic, and egregious thumbing of the nose at the International Community, to be considered in it of itself an admission of guilt, from the Libyan Government head himself.

As sad as this case is, it has only set a precedent for other heinous acts to follow. And the delayed justice which the families received from the Lockerbie Scotland Case, only sought to reaffirm the depravity, and degradations which tyrants may go to, an order to escape justice.

This case  helps to shed light on The February 14, 2005, attack that killed Rafic Hariri, the President at the time of Lebanon, which was a terrible blow for the advancement of Lebanese nationalism, and served only to strengthen the hold that Bashar al-Assad’s Syria had on the country, as an illegitimate, occupying power. And although the Syrian government was eventually forced to leave Lebanon in 2006 shortly before Israel’s war with Hezbollah. The perpetrators of this crime were never caught. A special tribunal was established shortly after the death of the former Lebanese Prime Minister, which has been headed by United Nations Independent International Investigation Commissioner Daniel Bellamare. The good news is that the Special Tribunal for Lebanon (STL) made their decision in the affirmative, upholding the charges against the accused, thereby allowing the trial to proceed. The crux of the decision fell to the case “Prosecutor v. Ayyash, Badreddine, Merhi, Oneissi and Sabra case (“Ayyash et al.”)” and has been ongoing since 2009. The antecedents of the case stipulate that these four Lebanese nationals, conspired with the regime of Bashar al-Assad to assassinate Rafic Hariri in February of 2005. Specifically, there are cellphone records, and computer metadata which points to Bashar al-Assad ordering these men to kill former Prime Minister Hariri, to prevent Lebanon from breaking away from Syria, after elections later that year.

This damning evidence will be released to the wider world hopefully at an opportune time which will allow for the United States to expose the crimes of the Assad regime. This is an opportunity that the United States cannot let go to waste and must capitalize on so that the administration can exert maximum pressure on the Assad Regime.

In light of the Lockerbie Bombing case, as well as the delayed justice, which was sought but only partially rectified, as relates to the Libyan perpetrators, it is my recommendation that the ICC should Expedite the release of the report from the Special Tribunal for Lebanon. They should have the chief prosecutor Daniel Bellamare present the report to the United Nations Security Council at the appropriate time to exert maximum pressure on the Assad regime in negotiations for his resignation (or possible ouster) from the Presidency of Syria. As relevant to all international laws, and treaties governing Rule of Law, the use of force, and the extradition of those held as property of the International Criminal Court, as expressly stated.

I know that these are steps which the court may in fact take regardless of the political considerations. However due to the nature of such rogue régimes as the Syrians. And their deep and close connections to the formerly dictatorial Libyan régime, as well as the delayed nature as such of the conclusion of the formerly incumbent régime therein, it serves the purpose of the court to be particularly pointed in there rebuke of such an element on the World Stage, regardless of the political consequences of doing as such, in my recommendation to the jury. 

And although both of these crimes of international terrorism are absolutely horrible, and dangerously heinous, the perpetrators have both been able to elude justice for decades at a time. And though while Moammar Gaddafi was held responsible for his crimes, shortly after the Civil War in his country broke out, in 2011, Assad has, as of this date, been able to elude justice.