Narrative:

Flight XXX filed as flight YYYY. Outbound crew contacted my desk to advise me that the flight was holding and they didn't have diplomatic clearance for landing (landing permit). Our paperwork indicated that we did have clearance. As it turns out flight couldn't land at alternate because it was closed. I was not briefed on this during turnover. The air carrier manager was in touch with the american government agency. He stated that he got approval for landing. As it turns out, the captain did declare an emergency. I never knew it was an emergency till dec/wed/01. I was led to believe that the permission for landing was granted through the american government agency. At no time did the captain operating the flight contact me or advise me of the situation, prior, during or after the problem. All conversations took place through a pilot that was told this by the ground handler. I also was not aware that the alternate was closed. I took over this flight and was following the flight number. Supplemental information from acn 552541: on dec/sun/01 I released a flight from fjog to ZZZZ. When the flight entered the ZZZZ area, local ATC told the flight they did not have diplomatic clearance to land at ZZZZ. They were also told that their alternate airport was closed. The flight declared an emergency and was permitted to land at ZZZZ. The landing was uneventful. At no time did dispatch have actual contact with the flight. The problem that caused the event was the landing permit. Dispatch listing a closed airport as an alternate was a contributing factor. Lesson learned. I need to be more cognizant of airport operating hours.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: L1011 MIL CHARTER DID NOT HAVE DIPLOMATIC CLRNC TO LAND AT ZZZZ, FO.

Narrative: FLT XXX FILED AS FLT YYYY. OUTBOUND CREW CONTACTED MY DESK TO ADVISE ME THAT THE FLT WAS HOLDING AND THEY DIDN'T HAVE DIPLOMATIC CLRNC FOR LNDG (LNDG PERMIT). OUR PAPERWORK INDICATED THAT WE DID HAVE CLRNC. AS IT TURNS OUT FLT COULDN'T LAND AT ALTERNATE BECAUSE IT WAS CLOSED. I WAS NOT BRIEFED ON THIS DURING TURNOVER. THE ACR MGR WAS IN TOUCH WITH THE AMERICAN GOV AGENCY. HE STATED THAT HE GOT APPROVAL FOR LNDG. AS IT TURNS OUT, THE CAPT DID DECLARE AN EMER. I NEVER KNEW IT WAS AN EMER TILL DEC/WED/01. I WAS LED TO BELIEVE THAT THE PERMISSION FOR LNDG WAS GRANTED THROUGH THE AMERICAN GOV AGENCY. AT NO TIME DID THE CAPT OPERATING THE FLT CONTACT ME OR ADVISE ME OF THE SIT, PRIOR, DURING OR AFTER THE PROB. ALL CONVERSATIONS TOOK PLACE THROUGH A PLT THAT WAS TOLD THIS BY THE GND HANDLER. I ALSO WAS NOT AWARE THAT THE ALTERNATE WAS CLOSED. I TOOK OVER THIS FLT AND WAS FOLLOWING THE FLT NUMBER. SUPPLEMENTAL INFO FROM ACN 552541: ON DEC/SUN/01 I RELEASED A FLT FROM FJOG TO ZZZZ. WHEN THE FLT ENTERED THE ZZZZ AREA, LCL ATC TOLD THE FLT THEY DID NOT HAVE DIPLOMATIC CLRNC TO LAND AT ZZZZ. THEY WERE ALSO TOLD THAT THEIR ALTERNATE ARPT WAS CLOSED. THE FLT DECLARED AN EMER AND WAS PERMITTED TO LAND AT ZZZZ. THE LNDG WAS UNEVENTFUL. AT NO TIME DID DISPATCH HAVE ACTUAL CONTACT WITH THE FLT. THE PROB THAT CAUSED THE EVENT WAS THE LNDG PERMIT. DISPATCH LISTING A CLOSED ARPT AS AN ALTERNATE WAS A CONTRIBUTING FACTOR. LESSON LEARNED. I NEED TO BE MORE COGNIZANT OF ARPT OPERATING HRS.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2007 and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.