Families may sue Israel for jet downing

Aljazeera ^ | 09/02/03 | Staff Writer

[bedolido]

Libya’s payment of compensation to the families of victims in two plane crashes seems to have inspired yet another compensation claim – by families of victims of an Arab aircraft that was shot down by Israeli airforce jets 30 years ago.

According to the Islamic Association of Palestine news agency based in the US, Arab families who lost their relatives in the shooting down of the Libyan Arab Airlines Flight 114 are planning to go to court to get compensation from Israel.

However, the families of the 106 victims would need help from human rights organisations, as the money involved to fight a case could run far beyond what they can afford.

About 28 Egyptian and two Libyan families have engaged lawyers to start the legal process. The paper, quoting Israeli defence sources said Tel Aviv had offered compensation at the time, but the victims’ families refused it as it would tantamount to recognition of Israel.

Key issue

But the families have denied they were offered compensation. The paper quoted Egyptian Foreign Minister, Ahmed Maher, concurring there was no Israeli offer of compensation. The Libyan airline, however, gave a token compensation of 1800 Egyptian pounds.

Another key issue the families need to decide is where to file the case. Since Egyptian families were involved, the courts could be petitioned in Egypt. But lawyers say it is anyone’s guess whether Israel would be bound by any ruling in Egyptian courts.

When the Libyan pilot refused orders to land, the Israelis opened fire and the plane went down in flames in the desert, killing 106 people

The Libyan plane was heading from Tripoli to Cairo on 21 February 1973, when bad weather forced the pilot to veer over Egypt's Sinai peninsula. The Sinai was then occupied by Israel. Two Israeli jet fighters intercepted the plane and ordered it to land. But the pilot refused. The Israelis opened fire and the plane went up in flames killing all 106 people on board.

Libya last week agreed to pay $2.7 billion dollars to the families of victims of the Pan Am jet that exploded over Lockerbie in Scotland in 1988 killing 270 people.

The French passenger plane UTA DC-10 was bombed in 1989 over Niger in Africa killing 170 people. Libya is finalising the amount of money to be paid to the victims' families.

Aljazeera

[SolutionsOnly]

Didn't we knock down and Iranian passenger jet a few years ago?

Hope this doesn't turn into a case of 'What goes around, comes around' now that the precedent is set!

[Eric in the Ozarks]

We paid the families in the Iran jet shoot-down.

[bedolido]

Didn't we knock down and Iranian passenger jet a few years ago?

Yes and missle cruiser blew one out of the sky after it didn't respond to warnings. However, we DID pay compensation immediately (fairly immediately).

[Tank-FL]

All of these case are different. 2 - State sponsored terror 1 - oops and 1 - I warned the fool!

[justshutupandtakeit]

That was over international waters. These clowns are trying to get Israel to pay for something which happened over territory Israel occupied i.e. a military zone.

Fat chance they will get a shekel.

[DonQ]

Notice: This Libyan jet was flying over the Sinai Peninsula while it was under Israeli control and an active war zone. Israel didn't just fire a missile and blow it out of the sky, the way the Bulgarians did with an Israeli airliner circa 1950. Instead the Israelis sent up two jets to make close visual contact. The Israelis signaled to the Libyan jet to land immediately - and the pilot refused.

According to the co-pilot, who survived, the pilot saw the Israeli signals, understood them, but deliberately decided to try to outrun the Israeli jets(!). According to the Israel Air Force at the time, it had heard rumors of Arabs trying to use a passenger plane - even hijacking a plane already full of innocent passengers - for some sort of terrorist mission (as happened nearly 20 years later with the World Trade Center), so the Israelis were very edgy about an Arab jet flying in a war zone and refusing instructions to land.

Seems to me that the survivors of the passengers ought to sue the Libyan Airline company because its pilot did a really stupid thing.

[bedolido]

thanks for the history. Didn't the Russians (USSR) blow a passenger jet out of the sky with several hundred on board in the 80's?

[AppyPappy]

Yup. Killed a Congressman.

[dighton]

According to the co-pilot, who survived, the pilot saw the Israeli signals, understood them, but deliberately decided to try to outrun the Israeli jets(!).

Hmmmmm, 727 vs. F-4. That's a tough call.

;-)

[dighton]

KAL 007

[bedolido]

that was it. Thanks for the link. I remember the russian jets were behind the Kal and warned it off (if I remember right). there was a communication problem and that's all she wrote. Didn't it stray close to a top secret site? Sad story.

[Alouette]

the survivors of the passengers ought to sue the Libyan Airline company because its pilot did a really stupid thing.

Could the families of the victims of Egyptair 990 pilot suicide crash do the same?

[bedolido]

Could the families of the victims of Egyptair 990 pilot suicide crash do the same?

You would think so. Isn't there a major lawsuit against the Saudi government over 9/11?

[Publius6961]

Didn't we knock down and Iranian passenger jet a few years ago?

Careful about hasty comparisons.
Planning and executing an act of terrorism is not the same as accidentally shooting down an airliner flying through a war zone and neglecting (accidentally or on purpose) to transmit the internationally expected "civilian aircraft" code.

[dighton]

I'll have to read and refresh my memory on the KAL 007 details.

[berserker]

We paid the families in the Iran jet shoot-down [post 3]

Not exactly: We offerred to make direct payments to the families provided the money did not go through the government of Iran. They refused this, so as of this date no U.S. money has ever been paid to the families in Iran. (For passengers from other countries, compensation was paid.)

[Eric in the Ozarks]

I am corrected.

[SolutionsOnly]

That's not a hasty comparison. But in a world court, I don't beleive such a distinction would be made (Which I why I think that the notion of a 'world court' is nonsense).
I recall the downing of that Iraqi jet - The Navy was perfectly justified to have shot it down in that scenario.

But suing Israel is only one step removed from suing the US for the Iraq incident - ridiculous as that propopsition may seem.

[SolutionsOnly]

That's not a hasty comparison. But in a world court, I don't beleive such a distinction would be made (Which I why I think that the notion of a 'world court' is nonsense).
I recall the downing of that Iraqi jet - The Navy was perfectly justified to have shot it down in that scenario.

But suing Israel is only one step removed from suing the US for the Iraq incident - ridiculous as that proposition may seem.