March 18, 1998

Questions To: The Danish Ministry of Foreign Affairs and The Cuban

Authorities

From: Christian Lovschall

-Is the Danish Ministry of Foreign Affairs satisfied with the content of

the Cuban government's answer?

-For what reason was the protest note from the Danish Ministry of

Foreign Affairs to Cuba kept secret from the family of the deceased?

>From Eva Janson in the Danish Ministry of Foreign Affairs, it was

explained that Cuba had been promised that we would keep things quiet.

Therefore, when Cuba's answer was received, pressure was placed on the

family of the deceased not to leak anything to the press or others.

Thus, our question is: why this consideration for Cuba? Whose interests

is the Danish Ministry of Foreign Affairs looking after? In short, why

has the family of the deceased not had an opportunity to read through

the information from the primary source, the protest note itself, but

must first have to be contented with an account of the content?

-Has the Danish Ministry of Foreign Affairs received an answer to why it

was necessary to shoot directly toward the body, a fact the Danish

Ministry of Foreign Affairs, according to Nina Jacquet, finds completely

incomprehensible. If Joachim Lovschall had been visibly intoxicated, a

fact we do not believe but which Cuba emphasizes, why was it necessary

to fire bullets to stop him? What does Cuba mean by a "presumed"

invading person - an explanation is wanted!

-Why did the Danish Ministry of Foreign Affairs request the Christian

Oldenburg family to keep things quiet, and in no way have contact with

the press? In light of this, why doesn't the Danish Ministry of Foreign

Affairs itself go before the press? What is to be kept a secret and,

again, whose interests are being tended to? As the surviving family, we

feel that it is not the deceased's or the deceased family's interests

that are being looked after.

-Will you protest that in the Cuban military service there are soldiers

employed with insufficient training? According to the information in the

note from Cuba, "the bullets were not fired singly, but in an

unfortunate volley, which was the result of an inappropriate handling of

the weapon." How grotesque of an explanation is the Danish Ministry of

Foreign Affairs willing to accept? How can the Consul's information,

about loose bullets and sharpshooting fired from the same gun, go

unprotested? (This is absolute nonsense!)

-Has the matter been taken up at the EU's regular meetings about

Consul's questions, and if so, what has become of it?

-When the Danish Ministry of Foreign Affairs itself emphasizes having

made a sharp response by note, a note which cannot be handed over to the

family of the deceased, has this note resulted in a satisfactory answer

from the Cuban government?

-Has an explanation been requested regarding the Cuban authorities' long

suppression of the murder? Why was there monitoring by the police when

we talked on the telephone with Joachim Lovschall's circle of friends in

Cuba? Why was his rented room searched and ransacked already by April 4,

1997, when we did not receive information about the murder until April

6, 1997 at 23:30? Where is the cash in U.S. dollars Joachim Lovschall

had with him? This missing cash seems to suggest that the soldiers have

committed murder with the intent to rob, or robbed from the grave. We

request an explanation of this matter.

-Why hasn't the Danish Ministry of Foreign Affairs attempted to take a

statement from Joachim Lovschall's Swedish friends he knew in Cuba? The

Danish Consul knows their names, addresses and telephone numbers!

-The Cuban authorities maintain that Joachim Lovschall invaded an area

that was clearly marked as a Military Zone. According to Ambassador

Kofod's writings from April 22, 1997, the information regarding such

markings is not in accordance with the truth. What have those from the

Danish Ministry of Foreign Affairs' office decided to do about this

evasion of the truth?