No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
The Use of Force against Civil Aircraft: The Aftermath of the KAL Flight 007 Incident*
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 09 March 2016
Abstract
An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
- Type
- Notes and Comments / Notes et commentaires
- Information
- Canadian Yearbook of International Law/Annuaire canadien de droit international , Volume 22 , 1985 , pp. 291 - 311
- Copyright
- Copyright © The Canadian Council on International Law / Conseil Canadien de Droit International, representing the Board of Editors, Canadian Yearbook of International Law / Comité de Rédaction, Annuaire Canadien de Droit International 1985
References
1 For a description of the incident, see Time, September 12 and 19, 1983; Facts on File, Vol. 43, No. 2234, September 9, 1983, 677–81; No. 2235, September 16, 1983, 700–2; No. 2236, September 23, 1983, 717–18; (1983) 29 Keesing’s Contemporary Archives 32513–17. Destruction of Korean Air Lines Boeing 747 over Sea of Japan, August 31, 1983—Report of ICAO Fact-finding Investigation, December 1983 (hereinafter cited as “ICAO report”); Rohmer, Richard, Massacre 747: The Story of Korean Air Lines Flight 007 (1984)Google Scholar; Mann, P. Q., “Reassessing the Sakhalin Incident,” (1984) Defence Attaché, No. 3, 41 Google Scholar; Martin, Peter, “Destruction of Korean Air Lines Boeing 747 over Sea of Japan, 31 August 1983,” (1984) 9 Air Law 138.Google Scholar There is an abundant literature on aerial intrusions : see, for example, Lissitzyn, Olliver J., “The Treatment of Aerial Intruders in Recent Practice and International Law,” (1953) 47 Am. J. Int’l L. 559 CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Whiteman, M. M., 9 Digest of International Law (1968),Google Scholar El Al Case (Israel v. Bulgaria), 327–41; Pleadings, I. C. J., Aerial Incident of 27 July 1955 (Israel v. Bulgaria: United States v. Bulgaria; United Kingdom v. Bulgaria) Google Scholar; Hughes, William J., “Aerial Intrusions by Civil Airliners and the Use of Force,” (1980) 45 J. Air L. & Com. 595.Google Scholar Unless otherwise indicated, all references to documents are to ICAO documents.
2 United Nations Doc. S/15966/Rev. 1, reproduced in (1983) 22 Int’l Leg. Mat. 1148. For a convenient summary of the debate in the Security Council, see Security Council, “Discussions Focus on Downing of Korean Airlines,” (1983) 20 UN Chronicle 20–31 (November 1983).
3 Ibid., 1149–52.
4 Ibid., 1150.
5 Idem.
6 (1983) 22 Int’l Leg. Mat. 1157.
7 Ibid., 1152.
8 ICAO Assembly Resolution, A24-25, in Doc. 9414, A24-RES, at 22.
9 (1983), 22 Int’l Leg. Mat. 1199–1220.
10 For report, see op. cit., supra note 1. For Council decision, see C-Min. 110/17.
11 C-WP/7770 and C-WP/7809.
12 C-Min. 111/3–6.
13 C-Min. 111/6.
14 For a description of the search, see ICAO report, 33–35 and Rohmer, op. cit. supra note 1, at 140–47.
15 See ICAO report, 3, item (4), which notes the non-provision of communications information on the first and second intercept attempts.
16 C-WP/7809, p. 4.
17 Idem.
18 C-WP/7809, p. 5.
18 Idem.
20 ICAO report, 2.
21 Ibid., 3.
22 Ibid., 56.
23 (1983) 22 Int’l Leg. Mat. 1149–50; see also C-Min. EXTRAORDINARY (1983)/4, at 7–8.
24 ICAO Assembly Resolution A24–25.
25 C-Min. 110/1.
26 C-WP/7694 and Addendum No. 1.
27 A24-WP/56.
28 A25-WP/2 and WP/4. This proposal and others mentioned in various notes below are found, or referred to, in the following documents: Doc. 9437 A25-R.es., P-Min. Assembly, 25th Session (Extraordinary) Montreal, April 24-May 10, 1984, Plenary Meetings, Resolutions and Minutes; Doc. 9438, A25-EX, Assembly, 25th Session (Extraordinary), Montreal, April 24-May 10, 1984, Executive Committee, Report, Minutes and Documents.
29 A25-WP/3.
30 A25-WP/G.
31 A25-WP/8.
32 A25-WP/9 and Corrigendum No. 1.
33 A25-WP/10.
34 Article 51 of the Charter reads as follows: “Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defence if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations, until the Security Council has taken measures necessary to maintain international peace and security. Measures taken by Members in the exercise of this right of self-defence shall be immediately reported to the Security Council and shall not in any way affect the authority and responsibility of the Security Council under the present Charter to take at any time such action as it deems necessary in order to maintain or restore international peace and security.”
35 See Doc. 7300 for the text of Article 94(a) and Doc. 7600, Standing Rules of Procedure of the Assembly, Rule 54.
36 See Article 48(c) of the Chicago Convention.
37 A25-WP/15.
38 Idem.
39 A25-WP/13.
40 A25-WG-WP/3.
41 Emphasis supplied.
42 A25-WP/15 REVISED.
43 Emphasis supplied. Note that the concept of prohibition has been substituted for the concept of prevention used in the Polish text.
44 The text of the amendment is set forth in the Annex hereto.
45 A24-WP/85.
46 C-Min. 110/15.
47 LC/SC-ICA-WP/3.
48 LC/SC-ICA-WP-12.
49 Examples of contributions to that debate are as follows: “Faulty Computer May Have Caused Plane to Stray,” The Citizen, Ottawa, July 23, 1984, at 6; “Accusations, Recriminations Still Focus on Downed Jetliner,” ibid., September 1, 1984, at 6; “Trust Key to Ensure KAL Horror Won’t Be Repeated,” ibid., September 1, 1984, at 23; “Could Jet Disaster Have Been Averted?,” Toronto Star, September 1, 1984, Aio; “Press Being Conned by Govt, in KAL Mess,” The Citizen, Ottawa, September 7, 1984, at 6.