Annex 12 (ICAO) [continued]
@sardak - very large thanks for the paper regarding status of compliance in region.
Some observations: by 'compliance' I meant to refer not only to status of agreements, but operationally. As legal counsel I advise (generally) clients to talk the talk (agreements on paper) as well as to walk the walk (activities pursuant to agreement, in point of actual fact). Some of the exhibits to the paper appear to show the subject matter coverage or scope of the respective nations' agreements. But not results of actual incident response, as sardak noted.
Second, isn't this incident (MH370) one that breaks open new problems, new questions? Certainly every major incident presents one or more unique parameters, but the current one presents a largely unique set of problems. And if one had drawn up a scenario based on what set of facts as do seem fairly solid at present and asked whether the Annex 12 agreements now in place are sufficient to mount the appropriate S&R response - would the answer have been "don't worry, the Annex 12 scheme will provide all the response needed?" I'm skeptical such answer would have been correct. Of course I'm looking ex post, and also, I'm indicating deference to those more knowledgeable.
Third, once the manifold mysteries of this highly atypical disappearance have been solved, my contention would be that still greater adaptation of the Annex 12 bilateral and multilateral agreements architecture will be needed.
From a legal perspective, we are as far from knowing what the questions are, growing out of this incident, as we are from knowing what happened to the aircraft, why, how, and by whom. Maybe farther, given the non habeus corpus of the airplane itself, at this point in time.