曝光臺(tái) 注意防騙 網(wǎng)曝天貓店富美金盛家居專營(yíng)店坑蒙拐騙欺詐消費(fèi)者

Ina paper submittedtoa seminaroftheRoyal Aeronautical Societyon5March 2009, George N. Tompkins Jr. stated:
The costs of terrorism today are usually borne by those States in whose territories the acts of terrorism take place and result in death, damage and destruction of persons and property on the ground and in the air. Take for example the terrorist attacks in the United States of 11 September 2001 (“9/11”) (hijacked aircraft of commercial air operators used for terrorist attacks), the terrorist attack in Bali, Indonesia of December 2002 (restaurant/nightclub bombed), the terrorist attack in Madrid, Spain of March 2004 (commuter train bombed) and the terrorist attacks in London, England of July 2006 (buses and underground trains bombed).270
Tompkins went on to say:
Now, however, it is being proposed that the operators and users of commercial aircraft – passengers and consignors of property – should fund the compensation for damage caused by terrorists who utilize commercial aircraft as the instruments of their terrorist attacks. Why, one might ask, should a selected segment of society, be called upon or be expected to fund the costs of acts of terrorism directed at society as a whole? Why indeed!271
This argument is seemingly shared by the European Union which, in a statement issued on 13 April 2009 stated that in accordance with EU Council Directive 2004/ 80/EC, all 27 Member States are already obligated to provide compensation for victims of violent crime (including terrorism) committed in their territory. Thus there is no requirement within the EU for a Convention designed solely to compen-sate victims of aerial terrorism. The EU went on to say that in Europe, manyStates have for some time had systems of State compensation for crime victims (some stimulated by the 1983 Strasbourg Convention). At the level of the European
268Joint Industry Paper, DCCD Doc No. 10, 26/3/2009. This paper was presented by the Interna-tional Air Transport Association (IATA), the International Union of Aerospace Insurers (IUAI), the London & International Insurance Brokers’ Association (LIIBA), the Civil Air Navigation Services Organisation (CANSO), the Airports Council International (ACI), the Aviation Security Services Association International (ASSA-I) and the Aviation Working Group (AWG).
269Joint Industry Paper, DCCD Doc No. 10, 26/3/2009 at 3.
270Tompkins Jr(2009, p. 2).
271Tompkins Jr(2009, p. 3).

A. The Two Liability Conventions
Union, collective concerns for the victims of violent crime .rst found expression in April 2004 in Council Directive 2004/80/EC272 which requires all Member States (at the latest by 1 July 2005) to “provide for the existence of a scheme on compensation to victims of violent international crimes committed in their respective territories.”273
Another commentator, who has proposeda treaty thatwould impose State liability for acts of unlawful interference against aircraft, has commented that the distinctive feature of his proposed treaty is that it would make States, as opposed to operators, answerable for damage caused on the surface of the earth by aircraft as a result of hijacking or other unlawful interference. He goes on to say thatholdinggovernments .scally responsible and accountable and therefore liable for aircraft hijackings and terrorism is not in-and-of-itself a novel idea.274 One such precedent cited by the author is the Libyan Government’s agreement to settle lawsuits concerning the destruction of PANAM .ight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland in 1988.275
It will be recalled that, on 21 December 1988, PAN AM Flight 103 exploded over Lockerbie, Scotland, as a result of which all 259 passengers perished together with 11 persons (local residents) on the ground. Indictment of two Libyan of.cials followed, along with a joint declaration by United Kingdom, France and the United States which declared:
The three States reaf.rm their complete condemnation of terrorism in all its forms and denounce any complicity of States in terrorism acts...They consider that the responsibility of States begins whenever they take part directly in terrorist actions, or indirectly through harbouring, training, providing facilities, arming or providing .nancial support, or any form of protection, and that they are responsible for their actions before individual States and the United Nations.276
　
中國(guó)航空網(wǎng) www.k6050.com
航空翻譯 www.aviation.cn
本文鏈接地址：Aviation Security Law 航空安全法(82)