|
MISC 76: Letter to the Clerk of the Committee from H2O Law LLP
MCDONALD & ORS v. SOCIALIST PEOPLE'S LIBYAN ARAB JAMAHRIYA & ORS
We act on behalf of the victims in the above civil law action currently before the USA courts. On the 21st of April 2006, 141 victims of Libyan semtex used in Provisional IRA (PIRA) attacks-including Harrods in 1983; Canary Wharf 1996 and Manchester 1996-issued civil proceedings (McDonald & Ors v. Libya & Ors) in U.S. District Court against the Libya Government and several of its officials (including Gaddafi).
The named victims, represented by the U.S. law firm Motley Rice LLC and its U.K. co-counsel H20 Law LLP, chose to do so having come together in their fight for justice against a terrorist state. Their united resolve is demonstrated by their decision to be class representatives for a potential further 3,500 victims of PIRA attacks which utilised Libyan supplied semtex throughout the U.K.
The U.S. Government sought to normalise relations with Libya so as to foster commerce and security. Using London for its initial meetings with the Libyans, it began to negotiate a rapprochement. However, U.S. Congress refused to allow the USG to reach such an accord whereby the pariah state would be welcomed in from the cold, before Libya had compensated the claims of U.S. victims of Libyan terrorism in its courts. These claims in the US courts included, as well as this Libya-IRA case, claims against Libya relating to La belle and Lockerbie (albeit the latter was not in fact in the US courts).
On the 14th of August 2008, the U.S. and Libyan Governments came together in Tripoli to sign the LIBYA CLAIMS SETLLEMENT AGREEMENT (LCSA). In doing so, the U.S. Government (USG) took the unprecedented step of causing a stay of the civil actions while securing huge compensation for the plaintiffs. Yet, there is one significant problem. The settlement only provides for the U.S. plaintiffs of which, in the Libya IRA case, there are only three. The remaining 139 U.K. victims (and the class action of 3,450 British) will not receive a cent.
As representatives of the victims, we corresponded with the British Government. The correspondence is attached.[1]
We understand that one of your Committee's members, Andrew Mackinlay, has asked that an item be placed on the agenda of the next meeting of the Foreign Affairs Select Committee in respect of the impact, on UK citizens, of the agreement recently reached between the United States and Libya. This letter amplifies on the disadvantage faced by UK citizens, consequent on this agreement and the failure of the United Kingdom Government to champion their interests both with the United States' Government and with Libya.
So whilst their American victims will receive compensation, the British victims are left in the cold to face the bitter chill of the latest IRA bomb last month (that once more utilised Libyan semtex in their community). The unsatisfactory position is that whilst an American client that was injured in a London bombing will receive several million dollars for his injuries, his fellow UK victim in the same bombing with similar injuries has received zero. There is no just or fair reason for this: simply that USG negotiated with Libya to help our American client and neither it nor HMG did the same for our UK client.
Apart from the clear injustice of the situation and the bitter irony that the U.K./U.S. allied front on the War on Terror has seen the USG look after its own while leaving its old allies hung out to dry, the UK Government has done zero to support its own citizens-worse still, it told the victims that good relations overrode the British interest of upholding justice and protecting, assisting and fostering the welfare and dignity of citizen victims. In short, HMG is willing to do zero for the front line soldiers in the war on terror, the ordinary citizen victims.
It is no longer tenable for the U.K. Government to do zero:
· The HMG can hardly maintain it is in the U.K.'s commercial and security interests to do nothing when the USG's rapprochement has only been to its benefit (it has stuck up for its own, made friends with Libya by paying compensation to the Benghazi victims and Libya plans big business with U.S. corporates).
· And whilst the HMG does zero, it transpires that Italy too has agreed a "friendship deal" with Libya that plans commerce for the future as well as compensating victims of each state (for some acts going back 50 years). This mirrors a recent French rapprochement.
Action call:
· We invite the HMG to start immediate negotiations with Libya on behalf of its own victims as represented in the US action.
· The obvious solution, as per USG, is to use the vehicle of the U.S. civil claim and the procedures within it for setting up a Trust, to be funded by Libya, for the benefit of UK victims.
We would be very grateful if you would kindly consider pursuing this matter with the Foreign Affairs Select Committee on behalf of UK victims of Libyan terrorism.
20 September 2008 [1] Not published. |