Unit 5: Anti-Hijacking and Aviation Terrorism
5.1 Meaning of Aerial Piracy/ Unlawful Seizure of Aircraft
The unlawful seizure (the “hijacking”) = the aircraft’s control-taking by force-or-threat aboard (the Hague Convention’s definition-family: the violence, the intimidation, the device’s use against the person-and-crew). “Aerial piracy” — the rhetorical label’s caution: the piracy-of-the-sea analogy (the universal jurisdiction’s temptation) against the treaty-law’s careful system (the jurisdiction’s allocation, not the universality) — the exam’s precise line: the hijacker is the treaty-offender, not the pirate-of-law.
5.2 Causes and Its Impact on Aviation Industry
The causes’ map (the honest analysis): the political terrorism’s weapon (the cause’s theatre: the 1960s-70s’ epidemic’s era — the Cuba flights, the Palestinian-and-terror campaigns; the state-sponsored faces); the asylum-and-defection’s tool (the individual hijacker’s pathologies-and-pleas); the extortion-and-crime’s faces; and the modern turn (the low-technology vulnerability’s exploitation). The impacts: the industry’s costs (the security infrastructure, the delays, the insurance); the victims-and-crews’ toll; the diplomatic crises (the landing-state’s dilemmas: the asylum-vs-extradition, the passengers’ return, the aircraft’s-and-criminals’ fate — the classic incidents’ lore); and the legal system’s responses — the three-convention architecture (5.3–5.7) + the ICAO’s security Annex (17) + the airports’-and-states’ duties (the security’s audit regime).
5.3 Tokyo Convention, 1963
The first pillar — the offences committed on board (the jurisdiction’s foundation): the flag state’s jurisdiction over the offences aboard the aircraft (the commander’s authority: the reasonable-measures’ powers — the restraint, the disembarkation, the delivery); the protective jurisdiction’s modest recognition (the landing state’s limited powers over the foreign aircraft’s affairs — the territorial discretion); the hijacking’s article (Article 11) — the duty to restore the aircraft’s control-to-the-lawful-commander and the passengers’-crew’s return: the obligation without the offence’s definition-or-the extradition’s compulsion (the gap Hague would fill).
This is a preview. The complete International Air and Space Law notes — full unit, Exam Focus box and model questions — are in the PDF / full version. Get the complete notes →